Thank you, Cboldt. I actually was sent a copy of the specific chapter and verse...I’m learning so much. Glad he will not lose his Senate seat over this. The huge amount of postings on this subject every time it comes up, just proves this is not going away unless Cruz grabs the bull by the horns and applies for a ruling...I fear it will disqualify him, though. Maureen
He might! There is a body of evidence that has not been probed at all, that affects his very citizenship. Under the law that granted him citizenship, he must have a five year continuous US physical presence any time between the ages of 14 and 28. A trip across the border resets that five year clock. Anecdotal evidence has him traveling to the UK and to Canada after the age of 14. I would not assume it is a slam dunk that he ever went a continuous five year period without setting foot outside the US, before he reached the age of 28.
From IN THE MATTER OF M, 7 IN Dec. 646 (B.I.A. 1958) ...
Following the present view, in order to retain his United States citizenship and in accordance with the provisions of section 301 (b) and (c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, applicant was required to come to the United States prior to his attainment of the age of 23 years and immediately following any such coming to be continuously physically present in the United States for at least 5 years, which physical presence period must follow the attainment of the age of 14 years and precede the age of 28 years. Applicant came to the United States on May 10, 1952, at which time he was 17 years of age, and has been actually physically present in the United States continuously since that date except for the period of 26 days when he went to Mexico to get an immigrant visa in July 1956. His absence of 26 days in July 1956 did not break the continuity of his physical presence, in view of section 16 of P.L. 85-316 approved September 11, 1957, which provides:In the administration of section 301 (b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, absences from the United States of less than twelve months in the aggregate, during the period for which continuous physical presence in the United States is required, shall not be considered to break the continuity of such physical presence.
Therefore on May 10, 1957, applicant had completed 5 years' continuous physical presence in the United States and had fulfilled the retention requirements of section 301 (b) and (c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. His application for a certificate of citizenship will be granted.
Apologies for the false alarm, unless of course, Congress has changed its mind on THAT aspect too!
Fairly complex interplay between the 1934 and 1952 Naturalization Act, relating to physically presence of the "new" citizen (not presence of the US-citizen parent, but US presence subsequent to birth). many people had citizenship, lost it, then got it back - all automatically by operation of law, combined with their life experiences, where they lived.