Cruz is a “natural-born” citizen so what you say is irrelevant. Natural-born subjects in Britain included ones born to British parents outside of the country. It’s also wrong and over-the-top about “allegiance.”
The Constitution isn’t so paranoid about foreign influence. You only have to live in the U.S. 14 years to run for president. You can live somewhere else for 50 years and come back and run for president. So, no, the Constitution set out a few standards, but there isn’t some perfect, consistent message behind them. That’s just your projection. It’s not in the text or the context. If it was, you would have to live in the U.S. a lot longer than 14 years to be eligible.
You also cannot be born in Saudi Arabia or Iran. See, it is not Canada we are worried about is it?
You’re wrong about the NBC.
You got your law degree where? Even the liberals go to Constitutional lawyer, Larry Tribe, would tell you and Cruz, you are whacked out under ‘original intent’. Larry would tell you Cruz is NOT eligible following ‘original intent’. Cruz’s claim to fame has been to follow the ‘original intent’ of the Constitution. Except he demands for himself an exemption.
Conservatives usually do not have much use for the entitlement class.
I guess immigration and naturalization services of the department of justice has been teaching people who want to become citizens all wrong for all these years when their course materials say over and over (and I quote exactly), “You must be born in the United States. “