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

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 ]


To: Cboldt

thanks


66 posted on 01/28/2016 7:59:06 AM PST by KC Burke (Two Corinthians walk into a bar...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]

To: Cboldt
There are two different forms of the "prior to" requirement used in the subsections of Sec 301(a): "prior to" and "at any time prior to." The two are not the same, hence the different terminology used within different subsections of the same Section. Sec 301(a)7 requires "prior to," NOT "at any time prior to."

Cruz's mother would meet the "at any time prior to" requirement, but does not meet the "prior to" requirement as she was a resident of Canada prior to Cruz's birth.

67 posted on 01/28/2016 7:59:37 AM PST by 2pets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]

To: Cboldt
"The fact that (5) uses the modifier "at any time" [prior to] doesn't make any difference."

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

Based on what? Since when do time requirements not matter in federal law?

69 posted on 01/28/2016 9:36:03 AM PST by 2pets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]

To: Cboldt
"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."

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

If they're doing so while specifically interpreting the 1952 Law's Sec 301(a)7 to apply it to a case, then they're misquoting the law, aren't they?

Quite simply, the 1952 Law's Sec 301(a)7 does not state "at any time prior to."

"At any time" does not apply to that subsection, while applying to another.

70 posted on 01/28/2016 9:36:03 AM PST by 2pets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | 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