Posted on 01/12/2016 8:00:15 AM PST by TangoLimaSierra
Only if you are a Democrat.
See post #60.
I see what you did there! But fact of the matter is, the power to NATURALIZE is the jurisdiction of Congress.
And if Congress doesn't naturalize anybody, the constitution tells us who are citizens, and who are not.
Dunno why people say, magic I'm a US citizen because of one US parent, when of course there are conditions that have to be met on US citizenship.
If the 1790 Act established anything it’s that the foreign-born children of citizens require naturalization.
To satisfy the political desires of some they demand that acts repealed centuries ago be used - and even that is not enough. That act must be carefully edited removing the singular citizenship of the parents.
The act in force at the time of birth controls. Dismembering a repealed naturalization act and carefully selecting phrases from the entrails is not law.
In 1970 the controlling act is the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952 which provided that citizenship may be conferred upon the foreign-born children of citizens provided both the citizen parent and the child fulfilled the requirements of the statute.
The statute says “citizen”. Are words to be inserted into statute, thwarting the will of Congress?
Just to be technical, current law is not the law that applies. It is the law at the time of birth. Section (g) was different at the time of Cruz's birth, but he still inherited citizenship under that section ( unlike Obama )
No, I haven't. I assume you have. What has he said about his love for America? I know he didn't choose to become an American citizen until just a few years ago.
“by birth” is not the same as “by statute”
That problem, my friend, is with the current makeup of the Supreme Court, not the Constitution. I used to think that Ted Cruz on the Supreme Court would help correct that, but now he is revealed as thinking the Constitution is alive, at least when the issue affects his desires.
My friend, it's not a problem that both a father and a mother are treated the same before the SC. And Ted cruz doesn't think the Constitution is "alive".
No, a natural born citizens IS necessarily a citizen of the United States, but a citizen of the United States is NOT necessarily a natural born citizen.
In simpler terms, if they 'meant the same thing', the Founders wouldn't have changed it.
How about a US Passport?
The power is to make a 'uniform rule of naturalization', so the only type of citizenship they CAN confer is naturalized.
No. Doesn't look like it.
(excerpt)
Actually, he’s already stated he has one. But, like Cboldt says, Sen. Cruz has a bit of an eye for the right dramatic moment, and will not reveal it before then.
Notice:
1790 Act: “An Act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.”
1795 Act: “An Act to establish an uniform rule of Naturalization; and to repeal the act heretofore passed on that subject.”
Both are explicitly stated to be naturalization acts.
Notice too:
For “the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States” to acquire citizenship required a naturalization act.
I agree and since someone besides Cruz dug up the proof, I have to believe that Cruz was hiding it and that it was virtually impossible for this brilliant legal beagle to be ignorant of the fact.
Look, get a grip on reality! The original Constitution accommodated human slavery in the United States. There was a War and there were Amendments to change that. There have been no Amendments to change or clarify the definition of natural born citizen. So if you actually want to be a Winter Constitutionalist, you have to stay with the original definition which counted citizenship decent through the father only. Otherwise, just admit that you are a Summer Constitutionalist, at least when the old thing gets in the way of something you want.
ok, thanks.
Just because a bill is called a Naturalization Bill doesn't mean that all things in the bill are about naturalization.
The language is clear.
Notice too: For "the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States" to acquire citizenship required a naturalization act.
It's not clear if they were simply codifying something that was already accepted to be true.
That kind of thing is done all the time.
Actually, he’s already stated he has one. But, like Cboldt says, Sen. Cruz has a bit of an eye for the right dramatic moment, and will not reveal it before then.
( And this guy wants our trust, and our vote).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.