Official Notice of Dispute challenges 4 candidates' NH eligibility (Cruz, Jindal, Rubio, Santorum)

The Post & Email ^ | 11/13/2015 | Robert Laity

[ScottWalkerForPresident2016]

I wish to NOTIFY you that the bona-fides of four Republican Candidates to be President is hereby DISPUTED. It is claimed that the following persons do NOT meet the United States Constitutional requirement that one be a "Natural-Born Citizen" in order to be President under Article II, Sec. 1.

I am disputing the bona-fides of:

Marco Rubio - NOT an NBC. He was born in the U.S., however his parents were un-naturalized "permanent resident" Cuban citizens when he was born.

Ted Cruz - NOT an NBC. He was born in Canada to a Cuban father and American mother who may have natualized as a Canadian.

Bobby Jindal - NOT an NBC. He was born in the U.S. to parents who were un-naturalized citizens of Indiaa at the time of Bobby Jindal's bitth.

Rick Santorum - NOT an NBC. He was born in the U.S. to a father who was an Italian citizen not naturalized at the time of Rick Santorum's birth.

[Fresh Wind]

Aw, Jeez, not this Obama again.

[DiogenesLamp]

Not going to read any walls of text you post.

[Yosemitest]

You can lead a Jack@$$ to water, but you can make them drink (knowledge) !
Go on with YOUR LIES ! ! !

[DiogenesLamp]

I worry about you.

[Yosemitest]

There's a great gulf that will separate us, always !

[DoodleDawg]

If the statute that naturalizes them says "at birth", then they are naturalized at birth.

And if the statute says that they are nationals and citizens of the United States at birth then they are natural-born citizens.

[DiogenesLamp]

There's a great gulf that will separate us, always !

Not so much. We used to be on the same side. In fact, I think we are still on the same side.

I support Cruz for President, I just don't buy all the fiction that people push to make him seem eligible.

I personally think the eligibility issue is of lesser concern than getting the right man for the job into the office. At this point, Cruz is the right man.

Obama already made the eligibility issue moot, but that's still no reason for us to buy into crap theories about what is correct and what is not.

[DiogenesLamp]

And if the statute says that they are nationals and citizens of the United States at birth then they are natural-born citizens.

Congress cannot make "natural" citizens. They can only naturalize (meaning to make "like natural") people.

Nature makes "natural" citizens.

Naturalization is akin to adoption. In adoption, you aren't really a genetic relative of the family, but everyone will pretend that you are.

[DoodleDawg]

Congress cannot make "natural" citizens. They can only naturalize (meaning to make "like natural") people.

And as I said before, in order to identify those who can become citizens only through naturalization Congress needs to identify those who are natural-born citizens. It's common sense.

Naturalization is akin to adoption. In adoption, you aren't really a genetic relative of the family, but everyone will pretend that you are.

Wow, you're out to insult everyone now. Dissing adoption?

[DiogenesLamp]

And as I said before, in order to identify those who can become citizens only through naturalization Congress needs to identify those who are natural-born citizens. It's common sense.

No it isn't. It is backward's logic. You are attempting to define something by what it isn't.

Your argument is "That because something is not this, it must therefore be that."

No. Just because a cow is not a chicken, that does not mean a squirrel must be a chicken.

[DiogenesLamp]

Wow, you're out to insult everyone now. Dissing adoption?

No, i'm not dissing adoption. I myself am adopted. It's one of those things that gave me insight into the fact that birth certificates can be issued that don't contain true information on them.

I merely point out that there is a difference between being a natural family member, and a "naturalized" family member. For most purposes they can be treated exactly the same, but this won't hold true if someone needs a kidney transplant.

[Yosemitest]

FACT: Cruz’s father’s Cuban nationality at the time of Cruz’s birth, is irrelevant, according to the law at that time,
just so long as he was a LEGAL Immigrant at the time of Ted Cruz's birth,
AND both of Ted Cruz's parents were legally married to each other.

What are the rules for people born between December 23, 1952 and November 13, 1986?

The 14th Amendment IS a part of the U.S. Constitution and states in SECTION 5.
The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
So, under that power to legislate, Congress legislated and the President signed into law:
When ONE parent was a US citizen and the other a foreign national,
the US citizen parent must have resided in the US for a total of 10 years prior to the birth of the child,
with five of the years after the age of 14.

... While there were initially rules regarding what the child must do to retain citizenship,
amendments since 1952 HAVE ELIMINATED THESE REQUIREMENTS.

When Ted Cruz was born, his parents were "IN WEDLOCK".

They married, moved to Calgary, Alberta, and in late 1970 had their first and only child, Rafael Edward Cruz.
Cruz was born on December 22, 1970 in Calgary, Alberta, Canada where his parents, Eleanor Elizabeth Darragh Wilson and Rafael Bienvenido Cruz.

Cruz's mother was born and raised in Wilmington, Delaware, in a family of three quarters Irish and one quarter Italian descent.
Eleanor Darragh, mother of Ted Cruz, was raised in Delaware, graduated from a Catholic High School (1952) in the U.S., as well as Rice University (1956),
so clearly she meets the residency requirements.

Source

In 1957, Rafael Bienvenido Cruz (Ted Cruz's father) decided to get out of Cuba by applying to the University of Texas.
Upon being admitted, he adds, he got a four-year student visa at the U.S. Consulate in Havana.

"Since he liked to eat seven days a week, he worked seven days a week, and he paid his way through the University of Texas," Ted Cruz says of his father, "and then ended up getting a job and eventually going on to start a small business and to work towards the American dream."

Only he did that in Canada, where Ted was born.
His father went there after having earlier obtained political asylum in the U.S. when his student visa ran out.
He then got a green card, he says, and married Ted's mother, an American citizen.
The two of them moved to Canada to work in the oil industry.

"I worked in Canada for eight years," Rafael Cruz says. "And while I was in Canada, I became a Canadian citizen."

The elder Cruz says he renounced his Canadian citizenship when he finally became a U.S. citizen in 2005 —
48 years after leaving Cuba.
Why did he take so long to do it?
"I don't know. I guess laziness, or — I don't know," he says.


So there is the law for the time Ted Cruz was born,
AND HOW Ted Cruz's PARENTS fulfilled ALL those requirements of the law that time, for Ted Cruz to be a "Natural Born Citizen".
Ted Cruz did NOT NEED a Court and a Judge to "Nationalize" him.

“Senator Cruz became a U.S. citizen at birth, and he never had to go through a naturalization process after birth to become a U.S. citizen,” said spokeswoman Catherine Frazier.
... The U.S. Constitution allows only a “natural born” American citizen to serve as president.
Most legal scholars who have studied the question agree that includes an American born overseas to an American parent, such as Cruz.

[Ray76]

> People that are made U.S. Citizens by the naturalization process, have a document stating they are naturalized.

False.

[Ray76]

> But in point of fact they do go through the naturalization process.

Naturalization does not necessarily entail a process. Whether a “process” is involved or not is not determinative, Congressional Act is.

[Yosemitest]

Then you have never been to a naturalization process.
Just what do you think those papers are, that the Judge signs and gives to the "naturalized" ?
Get A CLUE, because I've been with a group of people that WERE naturalized.

[DoodleDawg]

No it isn't. It is backward's logic. You are attempting to define something by what it isn't.

OK so let's take this one step at a time and see if we can unravel your twisted logic. Who does not need to be naturalized in order to become a citizen?

[DoodleDawg]

Whether a “process” is involved or not is not determinative, Congressional Act is.

A foreign born person is not naturalized by act of Congress. They are naturalized under the laws of naturalization.

[Yosemitest]

The wealth of IGNORANCE never ceases to amaze me.

Certificate of Naturalization Application Guide

Volume 12 - Citizenship & Naturalization, Part K - Certificates of Citizenship and Naturalization
Chapter 3 - Certificate of Naturalization

What is a Certificate of Naturalization?

[Ray76]

> Ted Cruz did NOT NEED a Court and a Judge to “Nationalize” him.

He required a Congressional Act.

You have posted nothing but allegory. Part of that allegory is misleading: “amendments since 1952 HAVE ELIMINATED THESE REQUIREMENTS”. A true statement, but misleading.

Oct. 27, 1972 the requirements of Pub.L. 82–414 § 301 were amended to require two years physical presence between ages of 14 and 28 years old (Pub. L. 92–584 § 1,3; 86 Stat. 1289;)

Oct. 10, 1978 the retention requirements were repealed (Pub. L. 95–432 §§ 1,3; 92 Stat. 1046)

The elimination of the retention requirements occurred in 1978, just shy of 8 years after Cruz was born. By that time he and his citizen parent had returned to the United States where he has remained.

[Ray76]

Some persons must complete a process, others do not.

Congressional Acts varying in the requirements imposed.