Replies

No legitimate authority has ever established that “Natural Born Citizen” is MORE restrictive than “a citizen at birth.”

The TEXT of the Constitution would make no sense if the qualifications for President were identical to those for the Congress, because being a “citizen” is required for the Congress, while “Natural Born citizen” is required for the Presidency. So we can be certain that “Natural Born citizen” is not synonymous with “citizen.”

But there is no conclusive argument that NBC is MORE restrictive than “citizen at birth.”

The oft-cited Minor v. Happersett does NOT establish a requirement of birth to two citizen parents. What it says is that “it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.” But the Court did NOT say that ONLY those born of two citizen parents are “natural-born citizens.” In fact, the decision explicitly acknowledges this.

Ted Cruz was a citizen at the moment of his birth. That is SUFFICIENT to qualify as a NBC.

If Barry Soetoro is the son of Barack Hussein Obama, (as claimed on the crudely-forged birth certificate with the typefaces of six different typewriters on it) of Kenya, then Soetoro was a British Subject at birth—and STILL IS A BRITISH SUBJECT—and an illegal alien.

If Barry Soetoro is the son of Frank Marshall Davis, then Soetoro IS a Natural Born Citizen. But he isn’t Barack Hussein Obama.

If Barry Soetoro became an Indonesian citizen, then whatever he was at birth, he is NOW an illegal alien.

So, please, lamestream media, let there be a FULL AIRING of this issue. Please, please, place the story of Ted Cruz’s citizenship right alongside the story of Barry Soetoro’s citizenship!

To the editor: A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one non-citizen parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, provided the American parent was physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child’s birth.

For birth between Dec. 24, 1952, and Nov. 13, 1986, a period of 10 years — five after the age of 14 — is required for physical presence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.

Since Cruz entered the United States in possession of a United States passport, I presume his mother met the physical presence requirements of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Stuart Shelby, Santa Monica

The writer is a retired immigration judge.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/readersreact/la-le-0228-saturday-ted-cruz-20150228-story.html

Grade school in the ‘50’s taught us two American citizen parents.

Grade school was incorrect.

Please provide the relevant sections of the U.S. Constitution that clearly and unambiguously define "Natural Born" as requiring two U.S. Citizens at birth.

Lacking that, Please provide the relevant sections of U.S. Federal Law that clearly and unambiguously define "Natural Born" as requiring two U.S. Citizens at birth.

Lacking that, Please provide the relevant rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court that clearly and unambiguously define "Natural Born" as requiring two U.S. Citizens at birth.

They don't exist.