.
Naturalization has nothing to do with Cruz; he could not be naturalized, since he was already born a citizen.
Some people are really dense!
Yes, YOU are extremely “dense”.
Though a citizen, Ted is NOT a NBC!
Cruz has not said that being born on foreign soil to a Cuban father and American mother who were Canadian citizens, defines Natural Born Citizenship, in any case but his own.
So, was he an anchor baby to Canada? No, he was born a natural born Canadian citizen.
... Naturalization has nothing to do with Cruz; he could not be naturalized, since he was already born a citizen.
Some people are really dense!
They are propagating all of donnie’s lies, not just this one.
You’re really dense. Cruz is NOT a Natural Born Citizen.
“Some people are really dense!”
Unfortunately, you happen to be describing yourself, because you are stubbornly basing your opinion on a number of false assumptions.
“Naturalization has nothing to do with Cruz;”
Ted Cruz has said the opposite, because Ted Cruz claims to have acquired U.S. citizenship by reason of his mother being a U.S. citizen. Acquisition of U.S. citizenship by a child born abroad with one alien parent and one U.S. citizen parent is authorized only by the U.S. Naturalizaiton Act of 1952 for a person born in 1970. Furthermore, no person born abroad without diplomatic immunity has ever been recognized as a natural born nation or a natural born citizen in England, Great Britain, or the United States. Birth abroad has always required diplomatic immunity to shield the child from allegiance to the foreign sovereign in order to be a natural born citizen, otherwise such a child always required letters patent from the sovereign to become a denizen or an act of Parliament or a colonial assembly to naturalize as a subject or a citizen.
“he could not be naturalized, since he was already born a citizen.”
That is another false assumption. You assume the child born abroad is born as a natural born citizen. That is simply not possible, unless the child was shielded from local, temporary, and permanent allegiance at birth to the foreign sovereign by diplomatic immunity against that foreign sovereignty. Without a form of diplomatic immunity, the child is born within the jurisdiction and obligation of allegiance to a foreign sovereign, which in the case of a U.S. citizen father, results in a form of allegiance, obligation, and duty which is divided between the foreign sovereign and the sovereign United States. No person can be a natural born citizen of any place in the presence of divided obligations of allegiance and citizenship. In such cases of divided allegiance and divided citizenship obligations at birth, the only means of resolving the division of such obligations is by the application of statutory laws of naturalization which create the legal fiction of adopted citizenship renouncing and/or preferring the conflicting obligations of allegiance and citizenship.
When the naturalization is described as occurring at birth, what is actually taking place is the child begins at birth with being alienated from the father’s sovereign by being born in the presence of the sovereignty and protection of the foreign sovereign and usually acquiring an obligation of allegiance to that foreign sovereign. Subsequent to the alienation at birth, the child also acquires the right for a parent or a child to elect to adopt or not to adopt U.S. citizenship by the authority of a naturalization law, and the naturalization law creates the legal fiction the child was born with some and not all of the rights and obligations of an actual citizen retroactive to the moment of birth, which is called being naturalized at birth. By contrast, and actual natural born citizen is born with no other foreign obligation of allegiance or citizenship besides United States citizenship, whether or not the parent or child would voluntary choose to adopt the U.S. citizenship; they simply have no voluntary choice in the matter. This is why every person born abroad without diplomatic immunity and lawfully acquiring citizenship, with our without citizen parents, has done so by the authority of a naturalization act that creates the legal fiction the person enjoys rights and obligations similar to and not the same as an actual natural born citizen.
Note, it will not work to deny the existence of law that implements what I have described, because they are evidenced in the historical naturalization acts, the case law, the supreme court decisions, and the U.S. State Department Foreign Affairs Manual that administers that law. I’ve posted them all before, and if need be will post them again.