Cruz has never been naturalized because he has been an American citizen since birth.
Cruz’s situation is not comparable to Soetoro’s because:
1) Soetoro’s mother did not meet the legal conditions for transmitting citizenship to Soetoro at birth. Cruz’s mother did meet the legal conditions for transmitting citizenship to her child.
2) Other than being the son of Frank Marshall Davis, Soetoro’s only chance of being an American citizen at birth was being born in the U.S. Since Soetoro’s “birth certificate” is a rank forgery, his “birth” in “Hawaii” is not established.
3) Soetoro was registered in school in Indonesia as an Indonesian. Soetoro reportedly claimed Indonesian citizenship when applying to Occidental. There are no comparable shady dealings in Cruz’s biography.
I have read all the stuff about the LAW OF NATIONS. All interesting. But there is no unambiguous proof that the term “natural born citizen” as used in the Constitution was intended to be NARROWER than “citizen at birth.” I.e., a person who never needed to be NATURALIZED.
The big difference between Soetoro and Cruz is that Cruz is indubitably a citizen, while Soetoro is very likely an illegal alien.
“The big difference between Soetoro and Cruz is that Cruz is indubitably a citizen, while Soetoro is very likely an illegal alien.”
Cruz was born outside of America. No one disputes this. I do not want someone born outside of America as my president, even if it is Cruz. Why open the door?
Sorry you don’t have facts straight.
Three types of citizenship are recognized by our government: native born (jus solis); naturalized; and citizen-by-statute (jus sanguinas, or derived citizenship from parents).
All have equal rights. All can serve in Congress, either as a Representative in the House, or as a Senator in the Senate.
[Note: since BHO2 was inaugurated in January 2009, this section on citizenship statutes in the Naturalization and Immigration online site have been frequently altered. This presentation refers to what the statute stated in 2009.]
The following link will take you to the government’s own Immigration Service web page.
Natural born Citizen is NOT a type of statutory citizenship. Natural born is ONLY an eligibility requirement for the U.S. Presidency per Article II, Section 1, clause 5, of the U.S. Constitution, and requires, as per the Founders, the President to be born in the United States (jus solis) AND of two citizen parents (jus sanguinas).
The definition of natural born Citizen appears in the holding of SCOTUS’s unanimous decision of Minor v. Happersett (1874).
Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Constitution did not grant women the right to vote...
The Minor v. Happersett ruling was based on an interpretation of the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court readily accepted that Minor was a citizen of the United States, but it held that the constitutionally protected privileges of citizenship did not include the right to vote.
SCOTUS rejected Minor’s argument that she was a citizen under the 14th Amendment of the U.S.Constitution, and examined her eligibility, concluding that she belonged to the class of citizens who, being born in the U.S. of citizen parents, was a natural born Citizen, and not covered by the 14th Amendment. This holding has been used in 25 consequent SCOTUS decisions since 1875.
No one has the RIGHT to be President.
The eligibility requirement of Natural Born Citizenship (jus solis + jus sanguinas: born in the U.S. of U.S. citizen parents) must be viewed as a means to prevent split allegiance for any President of the United States.
The following is often used to support people, like Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, who seek to be President but it was superceded centuries ago and is a false argument.
“The First U.S. Congress included in the 1790 Immigration & Naturalization Act language to alert the State Department to the fact that Americans born abroad are “natural born” citizens” and are not to be viewed as foreigners due to foreign birth. They were not granted citizenship via that US statute rather citizenship was stated as a fact that must be recognized by immigration authorities. These children were not citizens by any other means than natural law, according to Congress, and statutory law was written to insure that their natural citizenship was recognized.”
This is not a reasonable explanation. It fails to recognize that Congress only has powers over naturalization and has NO POWER to define “natural born Citizen”, which has nothing to do with naturalization. Furthermore, if Congress wants to tell the State Department something, they don’t have to enact legislation to do it.
But more important is that all of the following naturalization acts, 1795, 1802, etc., were also passed to naturalize the children of U.S. citizens born abroad. And the words “natural born” were repealed in the 1795 Naturalization Act and never returned again.
“...Congress has no power to define “natural born Citizen”...”. This is important because that is exactly what happened in 2008 when Congress declared Sen.John McCain eligible to be President. He is not and never has been eligible due to his birth in an unincorporated territory, the Panama Canal Zone, where the Constitution did not follow the flag. Sen.McCain’s citizenship is jus sanguinas due to his parent’s U.S. citizenship status.
Note: BHO2 has NEVER claimed to be a natural born citizen but only a native born citizen.
Cruz has never been naturalized because he has been an American citizen since birth.
******
My son was born in the UK, with only one American citizen parent. I took him to the embassy in London when he was 2 months old to get him registered as an American citizen, and to get him his own passport (with a very embarrassing photo!)
None of the documents that I was given use the words “natural born” in any of the legalese paragraphs. He is just “a Citizen of the United States of America.”
This keeps getting repeated.
Suppose congress creates a law that naturalizes at birth everyone born in Cuba. Because the law takes effect at birth, it isn't naturalization?
Really?
Look up the act which grants citizenship at birth to the child of a single American Parent. Do you not see the word "naturalization" displayed prominently in it?
