Either his mother had to act (mandatory) to convey citizenship, or not. Those two positions are mutually exclusive, and you have asserted both as true.
As I explained, an overt action had to be taken by the mother to obtain US citizenship for her infant son. It was my assumption that she did register the birth with the consulate. Obviously, Ted could not do that himself. The use of the word "had" is meant to describe what actually happened.
Tom had to pay by check to buy the sofa. This is not to say that check was the only method to buy the sofa. He could have used cash or a credit card but had neither. Am I saying that the only way to buy a sofa is by check?
You further say that a person is not a citizen until the examiner approves the application.
Why is that such a difficult concept to understand? Ted Cruz received DERIVATIVE citizenship thru his mother. There are laws and regulations who can transmit and receive such citizenship. I provided you with the link showing those requirements as well as giving you an excerpt of one of the conditions that concerned Obama. Here it is
Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock
A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) of the INA provided the U.S. citizen 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 on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen, is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen, is required for physical presence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.) The U.S. citizen parent must be the genetic or the gestational parent and the legal parent of the child under local law at the time and place of the child’s birth to transmit U.S. citizenship.
Obama was born in 1961 to his 17 year old mother. If Obama was not born in Hawaii, his mother could not transmit US citizenship to him. Those were the rules at the time of his birth. They were changed later.
There is no such thing as a citizen in waiting. In the hypothetical you provided about someone who only realized his eligibility many years later, I explained why citizenship is not retroactive and only becomes effective upon approval. You cite the statute "A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) of the INA provided.
Again, you are literally taking the meaning of the phrase "at birth" to mean that there is some sort of retroactive citizenship and that the approval process is not conditional. The reason "at birth" is there is to distinguish it from the naturalization process.
From the State Department Foreign Affairws Manual (FAM: - 3 Not Citizens by "Naturalization" (CT:CON 2013) Section 101(a)(23) INA (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(23)) provides that the term "naturalization" means "the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth, by any means whatsoever." Persons who acquire U.S. citizenship at birth by birth abroad to a U.S. citizen parent or parents who meet the applicable statutory transmission requirements are not considered citizens by naturalization.
If the person you posed in the hypothetical got in trouble in another country and needed consular assistance, he would not be considered an American citizen retroactively. Unless he holds a US passport or some other proof of citizenship, he is not our responsibility. We even caution people holding dual nationalities that there are limits to what we can do if they travel on another country's passport.
You are engaged in these verbal gymnastics to justify your contention that Cruz is a natural born citizen. He may or may not be. This issue needs to be litigated before the court for the reasons I have stated previously. It is not settled law.
We disagree on that, unless by "had to be taken" you mean that she actually took an overt action.
-- Tom had to pay by check to buy the sofa. This is not to say that check was the only method to buy the sofa. --
Well, in the ordinary use of language, "had to pay by check to buy the sofa" is saying that his payment options were limited to payment by check - maybe the limitation arises by the form of funds he had at his disposal, maybe because the seller insisted on a check. If you mean something else by "had to pay by check," don't be surprised that your reader is confused.
-- Again, you are literally taking the meaning of the phrase "at birth" to mean that there is some sort of retroactive citizenship and that the approval process is not conditional. --
I never said that either the citizenship, nor the approval was not conditional. Both are conditional.
-- The reason "at birth" is there [in 1401] is to distinguish it from the naturalization process. --
the term "naturalization" means "the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birthThe way I read those statements together, citizenship under 1401(g) attaches at birth, and is not conditioned on approval. You have said that citizenship attaches after birth, on approval, and doesn't attach at all if the conditions are met and approval isn't sought. Well, that's the natural meaning of the words you typed, maybe you mean something different, and I'm just confused again.
-- You are engaged in these verbal gymnastics to justify your contention that Cruz is a natural born citizen. --
That's false. I find that Cruz is a statutory citizen, that because his citizenship depends on the statute, he is not a natural born citizen.
-- You really are a pedantic, pissant. --
That was uncalled for. I can only go by the words you type, and as i pointed out with the "had to pay by check" example, maybe the words you type are taken, by others, in a way different from what you intend.