[usconservative]

In response to the filings, Cruz's lawyers relied on Supreme Court precedent

What Supreme Court Precedent? It's been my understanding for weeks now that the USSC has NEVER ruled on the definition of Natural Born Citizen.

[Cboldt]

Cruz's memorandum of law cites the Katyal/Clement article, and relies on the contention that NBC is not defined. It avoids the cases that find citizens born abroad to be naturalized. It cites the 1790 act as a definition, and the "radical" (at the time) British naturalization acts that made British subject born abroad, into British subjects. It also states as a truism, "citizen at birth = NBC." It falsely says that "nowhere in the constitution does it say that a person must be born in the US" (Art IV, Sec. 2 is "citizen of a state," no help to Cruz; and the 14th amendment is "boring in the US," no help to Cruz, or "naturalized"). It also cites the Zivotofsky v. Kerry case where Thomas had a brain fart moment.

Although the consular report of birth abroad shares some features with a passport, it is historically associated with naturalization, not foreign affairs. In order to establish a "uniform Rule of Naturalization," Congress must be able to identify the categories of persons who are eligible for naturalization, along with the rules for that process. Congress thus has always regulated the "acquisition of citizenship by being born abroad of American parents . . . in the exercise of the power conferred by the Constitution to establish a uniform rule of naturalization." United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U. S. 649, 688 (1898) ; see also Miller v. Albright, 523 U. S. 420, 456 (1998) (Scalia, J., concurring in judgment) (recognizing that "Congress has the power to set the requirements for acquisition of citizenship by persons not born within the territory of the United States"). It has determined that children born abroad to U. S. parents, subject to some exceptions, are natural-born citizens who do not need to go through the naturalization process. 8 U. S. C. S:S: 1401(c), (d), (g).

On their face, the bolded passages are conflicting on the question of a 1401(g) person being naturalized.

Cruz's memo also cites McCain precedent and S.Res. 511, old-man Romney, and a CRS publication.

Finally, it cites the applicable naturalization law as evidence that Cruz was not naturalized.

IL State board response - includes Cruz argument - 58Mb pdf file