Cruz [Teammate]: Ted 'Identified... as a Dual Citizen...'

Breitbart ^ | 1/08/2016 | Breitbart News

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)97% has repeatedly defended his eligibility to be president this week, but wondering whether his Canadian birthplace would prevent him from running for the office has been on his mind since at least childhood, a classmate of his tells CNN.

[Timpanagos1]

"And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States..."

In the operative sentence, citizens is plural, not singular, meaning both parents must be US citizens.

[Yosemitest]

"Levin and the article. It’s not answering central question"

Oh, HOGWASH !
You just don't agree with the OBVIOUS ANSWER !

From Ilya Shapiro, a senior fellow in constitutional studies and editor-in-chief of the Cato Supreme Court Review.
Like most immigrants, he does a job Americans won't: defending the Constitution.

Yes, Ted Cruz Can be President
August 26, 2013., by Ilya Shapiro

As we head into a potential government shutdown over the funding of Obamacare, the iconoclastic junior senator from Texas - - love him or hate him - - continues to stride across the national stage.
With his presidential aspirations as big as everything in his home state, by now many know what has never been a secret:
Ted Cruz was born in Canada.

(Full disclosure: I'm Canadian myself, with a green card.
Also, Cruz has been a friend since his days representing Texas before the Supreme Court.)

But does that mean that Cruz's presidential ambitions are gummed up with maple syrup
or stuck in snowdrifts altogether different from those plaguing the Iowa caucuses?
Are the birthers now hoist on their own petards,
having been unable to find any proof that President Obama was born outside the United States
but forcing their comrade-in-boots to disqualify himself by releasing his Alberta birth certificate?

No, actually, and it's not even that complicated; you just have to look up the right law.
It boils down to whether Cruz is a "natural born citizen" of the United States,
the only class of people constitutionally eligible for the presidency.
(The Founding Fathers didn't want their newly independent nation to be taken over by foreigners on the sly.)

What's a "natural born citizen" ?
The Constitution doesn't say,
but the Framers' understanding, combined with statutes enacted by the First Congress, indicate that
the phrase means both birth abroad to American parents - - in a manner regulated by federal law - -
and birth within the nation's territory regardless of parental citizenship.
The Supreme Court
has confirmed that definition on multiple occasions
in various contexts.

There's no ideological debate here:
Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe and former solicitor general Ted Olson - -
who were on opposite sides in Bush v. Gore among other cases
- - co-authored a memorandum in March 2008 detailing the above legal explanation in the context of John McCain's eligibility.
Recall that McCain --
lately one of Cruz's chief antagonists
- - was born to U.S. citizen parents serving on a military base in the Panama Canal Zone.

In other words, anyone who is a citizen at birth - -
as opposed to someone who becomes a citizen later ("naturalizes"
or who isn't a citizen at all
- - can be president.

So the one remaining question is
whether Ted Cruz was a citizen at birth.
That's an easy one.
The Nationality Act of 1940 outlines which children become "nationals and citizens of the United States at birth."
In addition to those who are born in the United States or born outside the country to parents who were both citizens - -
or, interestingly, found in the United States without parents and no proof of birth elsewhere - -
citizenship goes to babies born to one American parent who has spent a certain number of years here.

That single-parent requirement has been amended several times, but under the law in effect between 1952 and 1986 - - Cruz was born in 1970 - -
someone must have a citizen parent who resided in the United States for at least 10 years,
including five after the age of 14, in order to be considered a natural-born citizen.
Cruz's mother, Eleanor Darragh, was born in Delaware, lived most of her life in the United States, and gave birth to little Rafael Edward Cruz in her 30s. Q.E.D.

So why all the brouhaha about where Obama was born, given that there's no dispute that his mother, Ann Dunham, was a citizen?
Because his mother was 18 when she gave birth to the future president in 1961
and so couldn't have met the 5-year-post-age-14 residency requirement.
Had Obama been born a year later, it wouldn't have mattered whether that birth took place in
Hawaii,
Kenya,
Indonesia,
or anywhere else.
(For those born since 1986, by the way,
the single citizen parent must have only resided here for five years,
at least two of which must be after the age of 14.)

In short, it may be politically advantageous for Ted Cruz to renounce his Canadian citizenship before making a run at the White House,
but his eligibility for that office shouldn't be in doubt.
As Tribe and Olson said about McCain - -
and could've said about
Obama,
or the Mexico-born George Romney,
or the Arizona-territory-born Barry Goldwater
- - Cruz "is certainly NOT the hypothetical 'foreigner'
who John Jay and George Washington were concerned might usurp the role of Commander in Chief."

[Timpanagos1]

Cruz must have an FS-240 or Naturalization Documents.

If he has an FS-240 he is an NBC.

[KGeorge]

You are disgusting. AARRGGHH What a filthy mouth and a filthy mind. God Help you.

[Yosemitest]

The ILLEGAL ALIEN IN CHIEF is NOT a UNITED STATES CITIZEN, and most certainly NOT a NATURAL BORN United States Citizen !

It's there for anyone who wants to take the time to find it.

One other thing.
Obama is NOT black !
The ILLEGAL ALIEN IN CHIEF is ARAB-KENYAN.

"Genealogical evidence has revealed that the impostering "first black president" Barak Hussein Obama is 6.5% Negro and 48% Arabic, the remainder 45% Caucasian."

The Arab-Kenyan Barack Hussein Obama II, (a.k.a. Barry Soetoro), ( the one guilty of TREASON ! ) has NO legitimate Social Security Number.
His father was NOT an immigrant to the United States.
Barack Obama Sr. was a "Transient Alien" because he did NOT intend on residing in the United States permanently.
Barack Obama Sr. was a dual citizen of Great Britain and Kenya, and NEVER a United States Citizen.

Read British National Archives Show Son Born To Obama Sr. In 1961 In Kenya!

His mother could NOT impart U.S. citizen to her son, Barack Obama II, because she did NOT meet the legal requirements to do so, at the time her son was born IN the Coast Provincial General Hospital, MOMBASA, KENYA at 7:21 pm on August 4, 1961.
Democrats knew this and tried to eliminate the "Natural Born Citizen" requirement at least 8 times BEFORE Obama won his election in 2008.

Obama is NOT a United States Citizen, and is NOT a LEGAL IMMIGRANT.
He has no VISA allowing him into this country.
Barack Hussein Obama II IS ILLEGAL !
He should be IMPEACHED IMMEDIATELY, tried for TREASON, SENTENCED to death, and then have his body deported back to Kenya.

The ONLY education for LIBERALS, and therapy for true Americans would be the PUBLIC TRIAL, CONVICTION, and PUBLIC EXECUTION of the ILLEGAL ALIEN IN CHIEF for TREASON.
Aiding and Abetting the ENEMY DURING A TIME OF WAR is what the Arab-Kenyan Barack Hussein Obama II, (a.k.a. Barry Soetoro), has been doing every since he set foot into the Oval Office.
And his IRANIAN SPY, Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett, is JUST AS GUILTY of the same !

[Timpanagos1]

While we know Cruz renounced his Canadian citizenship, do we know that Canada accepted Cruz’s document to renounce his citizenship?

If Canada refused, Cruz is still a Dual Citizen.

[Godebert]

Thanks.... I will bookmark the article for reference.

[Yosemitest]

"In the operative sentence, citizens is plural, not singular, meaning both parents must be US citizens."

Not APPLICABLE.
Laws CHANGE ( Read On the Meaning of "Natural Born Citizen" and review the supporting links).

For those who actually want to know THE LAW, HERE IS THE LAW as legislated and APPROVED BY CONGRESS according to the United States Constitution:

The ABC's of Immigration: Citizenship Rules for People Born Outside the United States
by Greg Siskind
All persons born in the United States are citizens of the United States (with the very minor exception of certain children of diplomatic personnel).
This is perhaps the only simple rule of US citizenship.
One of the most complicated areas of US citizenship law involves the passage of citizenship to children born outside the US to one or more US citizen parents.
While naturalized US citizens are treated like natural born citizens, which includes those who are deemed citizens even when born outside the US, in almost every respect, there is one important office that only natural born citizens can hold - - the presidency
(though expect to see efforts in Congress to change this if Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger decides to run for President).
Also, a person who is a citizen from birth cannot be denaturalized (though denaturalization rarely ever occurs).

The rules determining when such children are citizens are extremely detailed, and vary a great deal depending on when the child was born since the laws changed several times in the 20th century.

What are the rules for people born before May 24, 1934?

Persons born abroad before May 24, 1934 to a US citizen father who had resided in the US at any point before the birth are considered US citizens at birth.
The status of the mother did not matter unless the child was born out of wedlock.
There were numerous legal challenges to this rule, claiming that it violates equal protection by treating the children born to US citizen women different than those born to US citizen men.
The issue was never fully resolved by the courts, but in 1994, Congress passed a law retroactively granting citizenship at birth to children born abroad to US citizen women.

In 1940, Congress passed a law making illegitimate children born abroad to US citizen women citizens if the mother had resided in the US.
However, under this law, if the child was legitimated by the foreign national father before his or her eighteenth birthday, the child would not be considered a citizen.
In 1998, the Supreme Court issued an opinion upholding the requirement that a child born out of wedlock to a US citizen woman be legitimated before his or her eighteenth birthday.
The decision was reaffirmed in the 2001 US Supreme Court decision Nguyen v. INS which held that differing requirements for out-of-wedlock children of US citizen men versus US citizen women are constitutions.

The US citizen parent must have resided in the US prior to the birth.
This residence can be in the US itself, or in certain US territories after certain dates.
The residence can have been while the parent was a minor, and there is no length of time for which the parent must have resided in the US.

What are the rules for people born between May 24, 1934 and January 13, 1941?

In 1934, Congress passed a law allowing US citizen parents, regardless of their gender, to pass citizenship to their children born abroad.
If both parents were citizens, only one was required to have resided in the US, and as with the previous law, there was no required length of time that the parent must have resided in the US.

However, if one parent was a US citizen and the other a foreign national, the child would lose their citizenship if they did not either reside in the US for the five years immediately prior to their eighteenth birthday or, within six months of turning 21, take an oath of allegiance to the US.
These requirements were gradually relaxed between 1934 and 1940.

Illegitimate children born aboard between 1934 and 1941 became citizens under the general provision, and because the child was considered to have only one parent, no requirements were imposed that could result in the loss of citizenship.

What are the rules for people born between January 14, 1941 and December 23, 1952?

As before, children born abroad to two US citizens, with one parent having resided in the US, the child was a US citizen at birth.
No further action was required to maintain citizenship.

When one parent was a citizen and the other a foreign national, however, the rules changed substantially.
To pass citizenship, the citizen parent must have resided in the US for at least 10 years before the birth of the child, and at least five of those years had to be after the parent turned 16.
Because this rule made it impossible for parents under 21 to pass citizenship, in 1946 the requirement was amended to create an exception for parents who had served in World War Two.

Originally, for children born during this period to retain US citizenship, they had to reside in the US for five years between the age of 13 and 21.
However, an exception was made for children of US citizens who were employed abroad by the US government or a US company.

Children born out of wedlock to a US citizen mother who met the residence requirements were automatically citizens, and they retained US citizenship even if legitimated by the foreign national father.
For a child born out of wedlock to a US citizen father, to obtain US citizenship the child must have been legitimated before the age of 21.

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

Again, children born abroad to two US citizen parents were US citizens at birth, as long as one of the parents resided in the US at some point before the birth of the child.

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.
An exception for people serving in the military was created by considering time spent outside the US on military duty as time spent in the US.

While there were initially rules regarding what the child must do to retain citizenship, amendments since 1952 have eliminated these requirements.

Children born out of wedlock to a US citizen mother were US citizens if the mother was resident in the US for a period of one year prior to the birth of the child.
Children born out of wedlock to a US citizen father acquired US citizenship only if legitimated before turning 21.

What are the rules for people born on or after November 14, 1986?

Children born abroad to two US citizen parents, one of whom has resided in the US prior to the birth of the child, continue to be US citizens at birth, and need take no special actions to retain citizenship.

Children born to one citizen parent and one foreign national will obtain citizenship at birth if the citizen parent resided in the US for five years before the birth, with two of those years after the age of 14.
The child does not need to take any special action to retain US citizenship.

Children born out of wedlock to a US citizen mother will be US citizens if the mother resided in the US for one year prior to the birth of the child.
Children born out of wedlock to a US citizen father will acquire US citizenship if the following conditions are met:


• There is an established blood relationship between the father and the child,
  
  
• The father was a US citizen at the time of the birth,
  
  
• The father has agreed to financially support the child until it is 18, and
  
  
• Before the child is 18 it is legitimated, or the father acknowledges paternity in a document signed under oath

While these are general rules, Congress has continually amended and revised many laws relating to citizenship, particularly those dealing with the requirements for retention of citizenship.
If a person believes that they have a claim to US citizenship, they should consult with an attorney for a full examination of that possibility.

[Yosemitest]

You're grasping at "straw men" !

[House Atreides]

The process by which a child of citizen parents becomes a citizen of the U.S. is NATURALIZATION.
********************************************************************************
Ahh...where I come from (Pennsylvania) the “process by which a child of citizen parents becomes a citizen of the U.S.” is called BIRTH. But, of course, your mind is apparently off somewhere in bizarro-world where you conjure up silly thoughts.

[Timpanagos1]

Canada might not have recognized his statement to renounce but even if that is the case, Cruz is both a Dual Citizen and a natural born citizen.

But we will need to see his FS-240.

[House Atreides]

If you are posting falsehoods in this post, should you be ZOTTED?

[House Atreides]

“And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States...”

In the operative sentence, citizens is plural, not singular, meaning both parents must be US citizens.
**************************************************************************
In the operative sentence, children is plural, not singular, meaning a birth must consist of more than one child for the CHILDREN of that birth to be US citizens.

See, I can be as stupid as you (if I pretend to be stupid — perhaps you’re not pretending?).

[Yosemitest]

Whatever (sheesh) !

[TigerClaws]

Falsehoods such as?

Please correct anything false.

I’m here to vet ALL candidates - even those I like.

If you don’t think the Clinton machine won’t dig up anything there is to dig, get a grip.

But the current USSC is likely to say, “Politics decides political issues” .... unless it’s gay marriage.

I don’t think they’d undo a nominated or Cruz and certainly not a Cruz who won the general election.

But are there statements like this (allegedly from Cruz) on audio or videotape?

http://www.newswithviews.com/JBWilliams/williams300.htm

Don’t throw rocks at me. I’m asking questions.

If you have answers — here’s the mom’s proof of where she was born and proof she never became Canadian, etc.

Some of us actually believed in the Constitution when we fought Obama as ineligible. I was one of those people.

I don’t care if it’s Ronald Reagan back from the dead, if a candidate doesn’t meet the Constitutional requirements to hold the office of POTUS they shouldn’t be on the ballot.

[Timpanagos1]

I am both a dual citizen and a natural born citizen.

Ted, if he has his FS-240 would be a natural born citizen.

[House Atreides]

Don’t throw rocks at me. I’m asking questions.
**************************************************************
Are you legitimate or are you a bastard? Is there documentation (to which we can link) to prove either answer?

Don’t throw rocks at me. I’m asking questions.

[TigerClaws]

My wife is a naturalized citizen. Her home country required her to renounce citizenship there as they don’t allow dual citizenship.

Canada let in tons of peace-nik types during the Vietnam era. They likely allowed someone to become a citizen and still keep their other citizenship.

But, as has been pointed out, his father wasn’t a citizen. Therefore, the strict definition from the framers would mean Cruz isn’t eligible.

If a tape comes out where Cruz admits that (as the above link indicates took place), it’s going to be a big pie in the face. But maybe it won’t matter. Obama served two terms and the laws on his eligibility were always laughed off.

[Rockingham]

The language and meaning of the Constitutional provision as to "natural born citizen" permit dual citizenship. Since there is no international convention on citizenship, comity among nations tends to favor acceptance of multiple citizenship.

Well before the Constitution was written, it was recognized that citizenship at birth could be based on the citizenship of the parents instead of simply the location of birth. Diplomacy and commerce often had need for lengthy foreign postings, which inevitably meant that spouses would come along and that there would be births abroad. It was not thought that a child could fairly and properly be denied the citizenship of its parents simply because the child was born abroad.

This principle was recognized and followed in the citizenship laws of the first Congress. Such enactments are considered authoritative by the US Supreme Court due to their closeness to the drafting and adoption of the Constitution.

And, if you think it through, you may come to believe as I do, that this point is also connected to the rationale against anchor baby citizenship. The mere happenstance of birth on US soil should not be permitted to confer citizenship when the parents are here illegally. The citizenship of such children ought to be based on their parent's citizenship, not on having hopped the border.

[House Atreides]

But are there statements like this (allegedly from Cruz) on audio or videotape?
********************************************************************************
Let’s see, some random guy makes up an imaginary question and answer session, posts it on the internet, and you, towering intellect that you are, say “hey, it must be or probably must be true”.