“I’m not going to take your word on that one.”
Please don’t take my word on that, and don’t take the word of other people on that either. Read the statutes and the case law of the Supreme Court of the United States.
Ted Cruz was born in Canada in 1970, and the law which authorized Ted Cruz to acquire U.S. citizenship on the basis of his mother being an alleged U.S. citizen was the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952 which said:
[Quote]
66 Stat. Public Law 414 - June 27, 1952. TITLE III - NATIONALITY AND NATURALIZATION. Chapter 1 - Nationality at Birth and by Collective Naturalization. NATIONALS AND CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES AT BIRTH. Sec. 301. (a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth; . . . (7) 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 lest five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States by such citizen parent may be included in computing the physical presence requirements of this paragraph.
[Unquote]
Note this law naturalizes a child born abroad with a parent who is a U.S. citizen, so such a child and Ted Cruz are naturalized U.S. citizens by the authority of this law.
The U.S. State Department Foreign Affairs Manual acknowledges that immigration and naturalization law and says such a child and Ted Cruz were born abroad and naturalized as U.S. citizens.
[Quote]
U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual Volume 7
Consular Affairs. 7 FAM 1151 INTRODUCTION... b. 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(23); INA 101(a)(23)) defines naturalization as the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth by any means whatsoever. . . For the purposes of this subchapter naturalization includes:... (5) “Automatic†acquisition of U.S. citizenship after birth, a form of naturalization by certain children born abroad to U.S. citizen parents or children adopted abroad by U.S. citizen parents.
[Unquote]
[The Supreme Court of the United States also decided a child born abroad such as Ted Cruz can only “become a citizen by being naturalized.”
[Quote]
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 18 S.Ct. 456, 42 L.Ed. said “A person born out of the jurisdiction of the United States can only become a citizen by being naturalized....”
[Unquote]
Thank you for your relevant cites.
I have been reading up on this a bit on and off (especially during the Obama period) but you have sparked me to do a little more research.
I think the main difference we have is that I believe that there are two categories of citizenship, natural-born and naturalized; and you believe there are three, natural born, eligible for naturalization at birth, and naturalization.
In an earlier response to another poster I cited the Naturalization Act of 1790, “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”.
Now, that act is no longer in force, but it DOES use the term “natural born Citizens”. This tells me the Founding Fathers themselves anticipated statutory law as encompassing a positive legal definition of “Natural Borm Citizen”, subject to revision. I believe that future statutes such as the 1952 law you cited covers the same ground, and that “citizens at birth” is the same as “Natural Born Citizen” because of this.
Your second cite includes “Automatic acquisition of U.S. citizenship after birth, a form of naturalization by certain children born abroad to U.S. citizen parents or children adopted abroad by U.S. citizen parents.” Now, this was is of interest to me, because my wife is Canadian and our children are American born and adopted. Ted Cruz was not adopted, bt the law as written was trying to encompass every category elgible. Just because one is eligible to acquire “naturalization” doesn’t mean it is necessary, or that the person wasn’t already a citizen.
As the Canadian law is written, my adoptive children actually are dual citizens, even though Canada doesn’t know it yet. (They are not natral born, as the law was passed after their birth, and the birth parents were not Canadian). But, if my wife bore a child stateside, he would be a dual citizen at birth. The U.S. has no jurisdiction over what rules other countries make for citizenship.
Your last quotation is from the oft cited Von Ark case, which had to do with the inverse, foreign national giving birth on U.S. soil. The statement “A person born out of the jurisdiction of the United States can only become a citizen by being naturalized....” is more in the explanatory portion of the document and is at best a dictum, and not binding.
That said, I believe you have made a case against Cruz’ Natural Born status. I don’t believe that him NOT being a Natural Born Citizen is a “fact”, based on law and the history of this country.
I wouldn’t mind Mr. Trump or anyone else who has standing to get a hearing onthis, and get it cleared up permanently. I am confident it would bo the right way. Grayson would be a fantastic plaintiff.