Replies

Obviously you are another one of the many around here that believe our constitution is a living document and it means whatever you want it to mean. In 1790 Cruz would not have even been considered a citizen of the USA. Did that get thru? Not even a citizen! Now how you go from not even a citizen to a natural born citizen (NBC) as the founders considered NBC is quite the mental feat.

The son of a Cuban, born in Canada to an American mothers is not a natural born citizen if you go by original intent. Not even close.

In 1790 Cruz would not have even been considered a citizen of the USA

In 1790 it was made clear that U.S. statuatory law was part of what dertermined citizenship. Your original argument was that enacted laws were not needed to define Natural Born Citizen.

Since there were many U.S. residents who were not formally naturalized by 1790, allowances were made as the following notes,

"the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States". As it turns out, Rafael Senior had been resident in the U.S. for a long time and in Texas for more than a year before Ted was born. So Ted might well have been a Natural Born Citizen under the Act of 1790.