So having been called on your incorrect assertion, and unable to back you assertion up with facts, you beg off supporting up your claims with facts. I truly understand.
The current laws of the US do in fact, make one a US citizen by birth within our borders. This was established by the Nationalization Act of 1940 and is reflected in Title 8 US code section 1401 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401). That is the “simple” (as in easy to understand, deal with, use or not complicated) fact. Disagree with that policy if you want. I know I do. I would rather see a meritocracy where citizenship is earned, not granted by the location of birth.
But again, the speculation and hypotheticals about Mr Cruz’s citizenship need to be viewed through the prism that US Laws govern US citizenship. No other nation’s laws govern. And thus, is little more than a tempest in a teapot. If US law say that someone is a US Citizen, then they are a US Citizen. If they are within the dominion of the US, then they can and often are, forced to abide by the rules and laws of the US under penalty of prosecution of our laws.
Thank you for confirming that Cruz is a naturalized citizen of the US
No you don't. I have the facts as listed in the book "Law of Nations" by E. Vattel, I'm just not going to bother looking through the book to find that section where it describes this circumstance. I can already see that it would have been a waste of my time just judging by your attitude.
I deal with various incarnation of "birth" apologists all the time, and I have been developing less and less patience for their ignorance and/or deliberate misrepresentation of history and law.
The current laws of the US do in fact, make one a US citizen by birth within our borders.
More like "Defacto" and only as a result of ignorant misinterpretation of prior precedent. Even so, the dispute is not whether these people are "citizens" but whether they are "natural citizens." Again, if it requires a special law, it's not natural, it's "naturalization."
That is the “simple”
Again, "simple" is not commensurate with "true."
I would rather see a meritocracy where citizenship is earned, not granted by the location of birth.
Preference has nothing to do with it. I don't know about you, but my "Preference" is not how I determine what is the truth. What we prefer to be the truth is not always the truth, but those of us who possess intellectual honesty must admit to an unpleasant truth when we encounter one.
But again, the speculation and hypotheticals about Mr Cruz’s citizenship need to be viewed through the prism that US Laws govern US citizenship
It needs to be specifically rejected if claimed on the basis of any US Laws. Again, "natural citizenship" is a condition of nature, not of man made law. It is not subject to be defined and redefined by the latest opinions of Congress (who are attempting to pass Amnesty this very day as we speak.)
Again, as I asked Jeff,
Is there any Stone in our national foundation?