To: 2pets
Subsection 7 uses the requirement "prior to." Cruz's mother was a resident of Canada prior to Cruz's birth. Words matter. Yes, they do. And if I'm following your argument here, you're trying to assert that "prior to" means Cruz's mother had to have been in the U.S. in the period immediately preceding his birth. If that's the argument (and I can't fathom what else you might be saying), then you're misreading the statute.
"(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, 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[.]"
There are two problems with your argument.
1. The statute requires the citizen parent to have been "physically present" in the U.S. "for a period or periods" totally the requisite time. "Or periods" means these can consist of multiple, non-continuous periods of time. So it matters not that in the final period of time Cruz's mother was a resident of Canada, so long as at some time prior to the birth there was a period or periods of physical presence in the U.S. totaling 10 years, etc. This then has to mean "at any time prior to" or else allowance for multiple periods wouldn't make sense.
2. Your construction would be absurd on it's face. This is a statute applying to a birth abroad. . The statute can't be then purporting to make the mother be physically present in the U.S. for a period ending the date of the birth. Is the mother supposed to have magically crossed the border when she goes into labor? Your reading makes the statute a nullity -- in the case where the citizen parent is the mother it would never apply.
The effort to compare "prior to" with "at any time prior to" was good. But it seems you got preoccupied there and missed the back end where the statute allows multiple periods of time.
Did Cruz's mother meet the 10-year requirement? I don't know if that's been established. But the fact the she was a resident in Canada in the period leading up to the birth doesn't disqualify her.
83 posted on
01/28/2016 8:32:24 PM PST by
CpnHook
To: CpnHook
"1. The statute requires the citizen parent to have been "physically present" in the U.S. "for a period or periods" totally the requisite time. "Or periods" means these can consist of multiple, non-continuous periods of time. So it matters not that in the final period of time Cruz's mother was a resident of Canada, so long as at some time prior to the birth there was a period or periods of physical presence in the U.S. totaling 10 years, etc. This then has to mean "at any time prior to" or else allowance for multiple periods wouldn't make sense." That only works if Subsections 7, like Subsection 5, required "at any time prior to." It doesn't.
"2. Your construction would be absurd on it's face. This is a statute applying to a birth abroad. . The statute can't be then purporting to make the mother be physically present in the U.S. for a period ending the date of the birth. Is the mother supposed to have magically crossed the border when she goes into labor? Your reading makes the statute a nullity -- in the case where the citizen parent is the mother it would never apply."
There are any number of reasons US citizen women are temporarily out of the US and may give birth during that time. What matters, and SCOTUS makes this very clear in the the Wong Kim Ark ruling, is one's legal permanent domicile. Since Subsection 7 does not permit ten years, etc., physical presence "at any time" prior to the birth, Cruz's mother would have had to have been a US resident prior to Cruz's birth. She was not. She was a resident of Canada for 3 years prior to Cruz's birth.
Read the closing paragraph of the Wong Kim Ark ruling for reference.
84 posted on
01/29/2016 4:58:30 AM PST by
2pets
To: CpnHook
Furthermore, of a US citizen father and alien mother couple who reside in the US, it would be entirely feasible that the alien mother would choose to temporarily return to her native country to be with her family to give birth and then afterwards return to the US with her baby.
I find it odd that so many of you want to cherry pick which terms contained within a single Section do or do not apply to suit your agenda.
Quite simply, "at any time prior to" and "prior to" are not the same.
This is similar to what many people are correctly asserting: "born citizen" and "natural born citizen" are not the same.
85 posted on
01/29/2016 4:58:30 AM PST by
2pets
To: CpnHook
You can't educate an IDIOT who will not listen to FACTS.
But thanks for trying.
"Did Cruz's mother meet the 10-year requirement?
I don't know if that's been established. "
Yes, she did.
Exclusive: Birth Certificate for Ted Cruz's Mother
... The Cruz campaign was responding to inquiries from Breitbart News about a document showing that both of Cruz's parents had been named on a list of voters in Calgary for the 1974 Canadian federal election.
Only Canadian citizens were (and are) able to vote in federal elections.
The lists were compiled through a door-to-door process of "enumeration" by registrars, and were publicized partly so that mistakes could be corrected.
According to Elections Canada–the independent, non-partisan agency that runs Canadian elections- - "voters were sent a copy of the list showing the name, address and occupation of all voters in the relevant poll."
Mistakes were frequent (i.e. "Raphael" instead of "Rafael"), and voters were given the opportunity to fix errors.
Ezra Levant, a Canadian conservative journalist who was born and raised in Calgary, recalled the process of enumeration.
"It was like a census ... they were very quick and non-obtrusive visits, someone standing in your doorstep," he told Breitbart News via e-mail.
"They certainly didn't ask for ID."
"It is not surprising to me that there may be a spelling error in someone's name.
A name appearing on the list would not necessarily indicate that they were a citizen, or that they themselves had even spoken to the enumerator- -
someone else in the household may have spoken for them," Levant added.
The Cruz campaign told Breitbart News on Friday that Cruz's mother had never become a Canadian citizen.
"She was in Canada on a work permit and never became a permanent resident, let alone a citizen," said Jason Johnson, chief strategist for the Cruz campaign.
"She never registered to vote and never applied for Canadian citizenship."
In a subsequent statement to Breitbart News, Johnson added:"Eleanor was never a citizen of Canada, and she could not have been under the facts or the law.
In short, she did not live in Canada long enough to be a Canadian citizen by the time Cruz was born in 1970:
Canadian law required 5 years of permanent residence, and she moved to Canada in December 1967 - - only 3 years before Senator Cruz's birth."
The campaign could not provide her Canadian work permit.
Canadian immigration authorities could not provide Breitbart News with additional documents, citing Canadian privacy laws.
87 posted on
01/29/2016 9:37:44 AM PST by
Yosemitest
(It's SIMPLE ! ... Fight, ... or Die !)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson