[PA-RIVER]

I see the 1790 act as the founders telling us born over seas was not NBC, but naturalization they wanted to include that class at that time. They omitted the NBC language in subsequent acts, not including that class. NBC was defined prior to the act, so they had to add that class.

Washington would not invent a new term and not define it, then send it all over the country if it was not understood.

David Ramsay was that historian and friend of Washington, who took the time to write down a description. Born of citizens on US soil.

Vattel had it written down. It was the book in Independence hall that they used. We can't deny this truth.

If it required a naturalization act to include Cruz, then it required a naturalization act. Is it in our current law?

Everything I read keeps saying the 1790 is a dead letter. Does current law refer to a 1790 immigration act? Why are people saying the 1790 act was rescinded?

[Cboldt]

-- Why are people saying the 1790 act was rescinded? --

The 1795 act specifically repealed the 1790 act.

SEC. 4. And be it further enacted, That the Act intituled, "An act to establish an uniform rule of naturalization," passed the twenty-sixth day of March, one thousand seven hundred and ninety, be, and the same is hereby repealed.

Cruz is a citizen by operation of a modern statute. His citizenship depends on the statute, because he was not born a citizen of any state, and he was not born in the US.

The legal authorities say Cruz is a naturalized citizen. The popular authorities obfuscate the law and say Cruz is a natural born citizen.