Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Cboldt
-- whoever would have adjudicated Cruz's citizenship status would have had to do so according to Public Law 414, Sec 301 -- Hah. You were the incompetent one before! 01/20/2016 4:56:14 AM PST . 66 of 66 1952 Nationality and Naturalization Act, Sec 301(a)(7) [you'll find the text crossing from page 235 to 236]

------------------------------------------------------

That's exactly the section of Public Law 414 I'm talking about. The circumstances of Cruz's birth don't meet the requirements. Read my post, carefully. You seem to have scanned it and misinterpreted what I said:

My post in this thread: Why the circumstances of Cruz's birth don't meet 1952 Nationality and Naturalization Act, Sec 301(a)(7)

64 posted on 01/28/2016 7:31:50 AM PST by 2pets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]


To: 2pets
The text of the law says that the citizen parent, prior to the birth of the child:

was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years

The fact that Cruz's mom was a resident of Canada prior to his birth doesn't matter. The fact that (5) uses the modifier "at any time" [prior to] doesn't make any difference.

What is the rule that you propose (a)(7) imposes? What interval between entering Canada and giving birth renders (a)(7) inoperable? One second? One week? One year?

If you read the case law, the parental residence requirement, unless stated otherwise (e.g., "after fourteen years of age") is "at any time prior to" the birth.

65 posted on 01/28/2016 7:48:32 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson