Posted on 04/03/2016 9:59:33 AM PDT by Zenjitsuman
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CfHxyO9UEAEq2SG.jpg
Why do we seem to have another Obama on our hands.
Why isn't Cruz made to unseal his banking records His dealings with Cuba His Mothers birth records, her INS records showing she was inside America within a year of his birth?
No evidence? You mean things like:
Article 1 Section 8 clause 4
Title 8 Section 1401 and 1101
Naturalization Act of 1790
And what have you presented to support your case? Calling people idiots is about all I have seen so far.
Nothing but class from you Trumpsters.
> A US citizen at birth is not and has never been naturalized.
Aldo Bellei
Yes, he was a citizen at birth. However the Congress applied additional restrictions to maintain that citizenship. Bellei failed to comply with those requirements and lost his citizenship.
SCOTUS held that the restrictions applied by Congress to retain his citizenship were proper and legal.
I think you have me confused with someone else. I have always asserted that Sen Cruz was born a US Citizen and as such, qualifies as an NBC.
Congress has no authority, expressed or implied, to take citizenship from people.
Congress has authority to establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and can impose nearly any condition precedent or subsequent.
Bellei lost his citizenship because he failed to comply with a condition subsequent required by naturalization statute.
Read Rogers v. Bellei 401 U.S. 815 (1971) and Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967) in tandem.
Incorrect, Article 1 Section 8 clause four specifically enumerates that Congress shall have the exclusive authority over all rules of naturalization. That includes who is a citizen and who is not. Who is a citizen at birth and who is a naturalized citizen. It includes a great deal more and one of those is the AUTOMATIC loss of citizenship.
AND THAT WAS UPHELD BY THE VERY RULING YOU CITE.
Current code in the automatic loss of citizenship is Title 8 section 1481 - (8 U.S. Code § 1481 - Loss of nationality by native-born or naturalized citizen; voluntary action; burden of proof; presumptions)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1481
Read Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967)
Held: Congress has no power under the Constitution to divest a person of his United States citizenship absent his voluntary renunciation thereof.
Bellei lost citizenship involuntarily. He was a naturalized citizen.
The Supreme Court overturned portions of an act of Congress which had listed various actions and had said that the performance of any of these actions could be taken as conclusive, irrebuttable proof of intent to give up U.S. citizenship. However, the Court ruled that a person's intent to give up citizenship could be established through a standard of preponderance of evidence (i.e., more likely than not) — rejecting an argument that intent to relinquish citizenship could only be found on the basis of clear, convincing and unequivocal evidence.
SCOTUS also held in Bellei that it was legal and proper for Congress to establish rules of action necessary to retain one's citizenship. In this case, the requirement was for the spending of a period of time in the US after birth, which Bellei failed to do and subsequently lost his citizenship.
That’s not really on point. Expatriation is the opposite of naturalization. Expatriation requires an explicit intent to renounce citizenship. Naturalization requires explicit acts to acquire or retain citizenship.
Just demonstrating how to post an image. Although, the dog does have good sense. ;-)
OK. It makes no never mind to me because he isn’t going to win. It is going to be Donald Trump or some GOPee fella who waited in line like a good boy. Ted Cruz is a line jumper in the GOPee. That’s why they don’t like him. It is personal, not political.
6) The law was repealed and replaced five years later without the words “Natural Born Citizen”.
Why do people cite a repealed act ?
Which is all well and good, but it doesn't explain why some lawyers' FOIA has been refused. They obviously have no intention of stealing Cruz's identity, why not release the info?
North American Law Center
Unfortunately, there is no evidence to suggest that the parent or parents of Ted Cruz ever filed a CRBA form with the U.S. Government in or around 1970, which is why Ted Cruz released a copy of his Canadian citizenship records and not any U.S. citizenship records. At present, all FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests filed in search of any U.S. citizenship documents to confirm the true official U.S. citizenship status of Ted Cruz have been denied access.
[emphasis mine]
Here's a recent follow up
(Mar. 27, 2016) — At approximately 6:21 p.m. EDT, North American Law Center (NALC) lead attorney Stephen Pidgeon stated on the TNALC radio show that NALC has obtained “intelligence” and documentation from Canada showing that presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz was strictly a Canadian citizen throughout his life.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.