According to the immigration and naturalization office at the time (I was 16 so I did not get the college course on the process) I was not. I was required to accumulate documentation on residences, fathers name and residences, same for my mother, my places of schooling and other identifying and historical data.
I submitted all of that to someone.
I was living in Anchorage Alaska at the time and my mother lived elsewhere in Canada.
It seemed fairly quickly that I was given an appointment with a judge downtown. I went and he and I had quite a long conversation (1966, Vietnam etc.) and then he swore me in as a United Sates Citizen.
Some time later a naturalization certificate appeared in the mail.
When I went in the military I was required to show that documentation and explain the paper trail.
I think this means that your assertion that I was born a US citizen is based on hearsay rather than a foundation in law.
Using the debate trick to turn the burden of proof back on me is unworthy of a conservative in this context. That is not a friendly move.
I am sincerely trying to find out why it seems like FR has rolled completely over on the point of ‘natural born citizen’.
Again, what makes it OK that Ted Cruz with a very similar birth circumstance to me is automatically a citizen and I was not?
And I was not.
. . . and then he swore me in as a United Sates Citizen.
* * *
Actually, it sounds like the judge screwed up. I know, he was a judge and I’m just a loudmouth on the Internet, but I still think he screwed up. If you had citizenship rights by way of your father’s American citizenship, then you did not NEED to be *sworn in* as an American. You already had that citizenship. If you did not actually have the right of American citizenship by way of your father’s citizenship, then by what right did the judge swear you in??? Why did you not have to go through the usual path that applicants for citizenship take???
It sounds to me like the judge was just applying the principle of “belt and suspenders” by swearing you in — to make sure you weren’t further hassled — but that you already had the right of American citizenship. If this is so, you are a born American citizen, not a naturalized one.
I didn’t mean to turn it back on you, so please accept my Apology. I simply do not know what Law people refer to when referring to what constitutes a Natural Born Citizen.
Like many here, I always assumed it meant a Child of two American Citizens, born on United States soil.
After going though numerous Threads regarding Obama’s, McCain’s and even Cruz’s Citizenship over the last six years, it appears my assumption may have not been correct.
I am just looking for clarification based on current “Law”. Thanks...