Posted on 08/30/2013 12:02:15 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
“it is considered an assumed renunciation”
__
No, that’s not right. There are no “assumed renunciations” of citizenship under U.S. law:
“ELEMENTS OF RENUNCIATION
A person wishing to renounce his or her U.S. citizenship must voluntarily and with intent to relinquish U.S. citizenship:
1. appear in person before a U.S. consular or diplomatic officer,
2. in a foreign country (normally at a U.S. Embassy or Consulate); and
3. sign an oath of renunciation”
(from the State Department — http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html )
What you may be thinking of is the fact that it is much easier for a U.S. citizen born abroad to document his or her citizenship by obtaining a Consular Report of Birth Abroad (CRBA), and those can only be obtained by age 18.
However, failure to obtain one certainly does not result in loss of citizenship, it just complicates the paperwork required if and when proof of U.S. citizenship is required.
"Never been resident" means more in 1700s English that what was meant by the earlier "reside" for 2 years. Having had to wade through countless 1700s John Wesley sermons and the English of that era, "never been resident" would have meant that the father actually had to have "lived" there, that is, had his life there.
I repeat, IF Cruz decides to run and IF he’s the strongest conservative running, I’ll support him to the hilt and I believe most of the grassroots tea party conservatives will also. No way in hell will I support Kristy, Bush or any GOP-e backed RINO (Rubio for example) pretending to be a conservative. McCain, Romney should be the end of that trail.
If someone of the caliber of Sarah Palin or Jim DeMint decides to run, Cruz will have some competition among the grassroots. Some might also include Santorum or Perry as viable conservatives. Just praying we decide on the strongest conservative very quickly and don’t destroy any of them thereby allowing the sure loser RINO to take the nomination.
I’ll have to look for it, but I know I’ve seen the requirement that one follow through on citizenship gained from one’s parents even though born overseas. It’s too late now.
I’m guessing I saw it in the Foreign Affairs Manual from the State Deptmt.
FWIW Rafael Cruz not only had his life here, but the business he owned that took him to Calgary was in Austin Texas. There are those who would argue that the Republic of Texas is not really in the United States, but most of us Native Texans, if pressed, will reluctantly that admit that the Republic of Texas may actually be a member of the Union.
Just posted:
Conservatives shower Sen. Cruz of Texas with praise at Orlando gathering
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3061211/posts
I don’t have any particular axes to grind here and I would not personally deny Cruz a vote due to the controversy. Still, I would like to hope some lessons are learned from the previous debacle.
Personally, Sarah Palin is still my sweetheart candidate. Being a devoted Christian as she is, Satan’s forces will be arrayed against her coming to the White House. However here is where an adjustment of world view would be very helpful for her. Satan is in chains and cannot move any further than God permits. And God has made a promise to her and every believer, that first she is more than conqueror in Christ and second all things work together for good for her, and third God explicitly calls her difficulties “trials.” It’s up to her what mindset she wants to bring, but if God wants her ministering (yes it would be a ministry) in the White House she should fight for that to the end to see the victory, remembering the foe is not people, the foe is Satan.
I’d like to see her run, but she still hasn’t made any moves in that direction. Cruz is out there testing the waters.
Agree, and there are only 3 possible candidates I trust right now. Perry, Palin and Cruz. It’s actually possible that none of them choose to run. Who knows? If any one of them do, they have my unqualified support unless they do something egregiously wrong. If more than one runs, the strongest candidate should win. None of them should be destroyed for running.
Ultimately I think she needs to feel the support. She got a lot of mindshare but I’m thinking maybe she got few letters.
Well, I’ll write her a letter, I think. I will try to encourage her. Maybe I will be the “hundredth monkey.” Nothing against Cruz, and maybe a Palin/Cruz ticket or vice versa could be in the cards. I hope that there is more of a collegial spirit here and that discussions between the candidates will be based on refinement of good ideas rather than panning one another for bad ones. Staring down the guns of the lefties, that would be the most constructive course.
We need God and His light for a guide to our wisdom once more.
Otherwise we are going to get locked into endless worldly wrangles that go nowhere while the Democrats play their satanic symbolism masterfully.
This just is TRUE.
That’s why I think I am going to root for Sarah Palin to come out of the bushes. That she shouldn’t let anything, even her past failures, stop her. She’s the most devoted believer in God of any I’ve seen in the candidacy yet. And who’s bigger, Satan or God? I think I know how I’d place that bet. She’ll take some flak because she is over the target. But she won’t be downed, not if the Lord is with her. The only way for her to be downed is to step out of the fight.
We agree on the eligibility status of Cruz.
However, this is war and our nation is about to fall into the hands of the Godless.
Let me ask you a question.
If ultimately the choice boils down to a far left liberal who is technically constitutionally eligible like Hillary OR Ted Cruz who you and I agree is not a NBC, Would you.....
1) Vote for Hillary because she is the only eligible candidate?
2) Stand by your principles, stay home and not vote?
3) Be pragmatic and in order to revive our nation, vote for Ted Cruz... the only true conservative who at that point would have the ability lead us out of doom?
For me the answer is easy..... We first need to save our nation. Then later, we can have our principles.
Consider this.... Most founders believed that slavery was not a good thing for our the country but they also realized that slavery was an issue that would likely derail the establishment of the constitution. So brilliantly, they authored the constitution in such a way that slavery would not be sustainable.
We need to do the same with the eligibility issue.
For me, the ideal coarse of action would be for Cruz to declare himself ineligible thus putting Obummer on the defensive and at the same time, Cruz could vigorously support another eligible candidate like Sarah Palin.
Absent this unlikely scenario, as conservatives, we should to accept the reality of the situation and support him to the hilt.
It is a matter of survival.
“That language was removed by congress in 1795.”
Are you saying they thwarted our Founders intent?
Bingo.
That would do more for the conservative movement than anything else -- to show that he respects the Constitution too much to file for an office for which he is Constitutionally ineligible -- in stark contrast to someone else who had to lie about his paternity to get around the Constitution.
Exactly right. Both Obama and Cruz suffer the same fatal criterion of being born to foreign-national fathers. It doesn’t matter where they are born, they do not meet the Supreme Court’s exclusive definition of natural-born citizen. If Cruz admits this, then people will start to understand why Obama was never eligible for office. It’s no wonder that so many Obots are angrily insisting that Cruz is eligible.
You make a good point that escapes people new to this.
The Naturalization Act of 1790 codified Article II into law.
It made anyone who was a citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution into a natural born citizen, even if they were born overseas and in foreign countries, thus the "shall be considered as natural born citizen" language.
That's why that exemption was not renewed in the 1795 Act -- because it was only for those who were citizens during the time of the adoption of the Constitution which incidentally took a number of years.
“..9 unelected and unaccountable people, the same people who gave us Roe v. Wade. ..”
And part of that group look to foreign law to rule on the UNITED STATES Constitution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.