Replies

I showed you where it originated. Twice. But you’re going to keep on ignoring the simple facts of the matter because your mind is made up. Fine by me...we don’t even know if Cruz is going to run.

I am curious, though....do you have any information on where and when “naturalized” Cruz went through this process?

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=d84d6811264a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=d84d6811264a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD

Hello, Catherine. I think that what rxsid was trying to convey is that a natural born Citizen doesn't need the operation of any law, or statute, to make them a citizen. They naturally are, by virtue of their being born on US soil to Citizen parents. There was an excellent post on the concept earlier in the thread, actually:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3016295/posts?page=101#101

I myself am married to a non-naturalized foreigner, and as I explained to my naturalized-at-birth (and therefore ineligible) child, the Founder's reasoning was that they/we shouldn't have to worry about her loyalty to the US if she ever had to decide whether or not to bomb Tokyo if hostilities were to break out (again) on her watch.

It's about the presumed undivided loyalties expected to be found in a person born both on the soil and of parents who are citizens themselves. This I believe was the Founder's intent in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5. Until SCOTUS does their job and rules on the definition of Natural Born Citizen however, we're all arm chair quarterbacking on the subject.

I do know what my sense of logic says on the subject. Your mileage may vary.

It took an act of Congress (the particular law in place at the time of his birth) in order for him to be a citizen. The U.S. Constitution doesn't grant citizenship to those born in foreign lands whether to citizen parent(s) or not.

Congress only has the power of naturalization. Although, they did try back in 1790 to legislate those born to citizen parents overseas, to be natural born Citizen. But they repealed that in 1795.

The Congress has, of course, changed the law many times:

U.S. Immigration Laws Over Time

Sen. Ted Cruz, assuming he was born in Canada in 1970 to a U.S. citizen mother, would have his citizenship status governed by the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, a.k.a. the Hart-Cellar Act.

Cruz was presumably naturalized whenever it was that his mother (most likely) filed the appropriate documents (similar to those) as described on the Naturalization Services page. Since he wouldn't have a birth certificate from a Hospital (or attending/certifying medical personnel) in the U.S., his mother would have needed to apply if she wanted/needed proof of his U.S. Citizenship - N-600. Application for Certificate of Citizenship or applied for a passport for him.

The difference here, is that those who want/need to prove their U.S. citizenship after being born in a foreign country (like Cruz), needed to apply for either a passport or use the N-600 form to lawfully enter the country permanently. Persons born in the U.S. obviously don't need to do that.

So far as I know, nobody in the public domain has seen his birth documents. We are simply taking his word at this point that he is a "citizen"...obtained through the powers and discretion of Congressional naturalization.