Comparing The 1790 And 1795 Naturalization Acts: Ted Cruz Has A Big Problem

[Steve_McGarrett]

What does it mean to be a "natural born citizen"?

Most legal experts contend it means someone is a citizen from birth and doesn’t have to go through a naturalization process to become a citizen.

If that’s the definition, then Cruz is a natural born citizen by being born to an American mother and having her citizenship at birth. The Congressional Research Service, the agency tasked with providing authoritative research to all members of Congress, published a report after the 2008 election supporting the thinking that "natural born" citizenship means citizenship held "at birth."

There are many legal and historical precedents to strongly back up this argument, experts have said.

Those precedents were the subject of a recent op-ed in the Harvard Law Review by two former solicitor generals of opposing parties, Neal Katyal and Paul Clement, who worked for Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush, respectively. They wrote that "natural born" had a longstanding definition dating back to colonial times.

British common law recognized that children born outside of the British Empire remained subjects, and were described by law as "natural born," Katyal and Clement wrote.

"The framers, of course, would have been intimately familiar with these statutes and the way they used terms like ‘natural born,’ since the (British) statutes were binding law in the colonies before the Revolutionary War,’" they said.

Additionally, the first Congress of the United States passed the Naturalization Act of 1790, just three years after the Constitution was written, which stated that children born abroad to U.S. citizens were, too, natural born citizens. Many members of the inaugural Congress were also authors of the Constitution.

Incidentally, this isn’t the first time the qualifications of a candidate have come into question. George Romney, the father of Mitt Romney who ran for president as a Republican in 1968, was born in Mexico. Barry Goldwater, the 1964 GOP presidential nominee, was born in Arizona before it was a state. Neither candidate’s campaign was derailed by citizenship challenges.

More recently, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., faced questions about his eligibility because he was born in the Panama Canal Zone while his father was stationed there.

Interestingly, McCain’s potential Democratic opponents — Obama and then-Sen. Hillary Clinton — co-sponsored a Senate measure to settle McCain’s eligibility. The April 2008 resolution said, "John Sidney McCain, III, is a 'natural born Citizen' under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States." It passed unanimously.

The Supreme Court’s silence

The reason a question still remains even after Romney, Goldwater and McCain is because the Supreme Court — the ultimate arbiter of constitutional questions — has never directly ruled on the citizenship provision for presidential office holders. And that means a note of uncertainty remains.

Some have unsuccessfully challenged the qualifications of presidential contenders, but courts have been reluctant to address the issue. Several citizens filed lawsuits asking the court to rule on whether McCain was a natural born citizen early in 2008, but the legal challenges didn’t go anywhere.

"We know from the McCain lawsuits, courts don’t want to touch this," said Sarah Duggin, a professor of law at Catholic University who has researched this issue extensively. "It very well may be that the courts would refuse to go near this. There are so many issues."

[VIDEO]Is Ted Cruz, born in Canada, eligible to run for president? (Updated)

The new analysis by Harvard alum Katyal is an obfuscating opinion that was designed so Harvard alum Cruz can run but it is not accurate with the founders original intent. Like when he references the 1790 Act, he leaves out the important wording:

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."

Katyal and Clement omits the father’s residency is the key determining factor in granting citizenship. Not just the status of “a parent, as the Harvard writers allege, but that of the male parent.

Cruz is a citizen. Get a life

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Idiot. Being a Citizen is not enough to satisfy Article 2 Section 1. You have to be a natural-born Citizen.

Yes being a natural born citizen does.

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

But not a Citizen. You are conflating the two.

 

[thanatos144]

What does it mean to be a "natural born citizen"?

Most legal experts contend it means someone is a citizen from birth and doesn’t have to go through a naturalization process to become a citizen.

If that’s the definition, then Cruz is a natural born citizen by being born to an American mother and having her citizenship at birth. The Congressional Research Service, the agency tasked with providing authoritative research to all members of Congress, published a report after the 2008 election supporting the thinking that "natural born" citizenship means citizenship held "at birth."

There are many legal and historical precedents to strongly back up this argument, experts have said.

Those precedents were the subject of a recent op-ed in the Harvard Law Review by two former solicitor generals of opposing parties, Neal Katyal and Paul Clement, who worked for Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush, respectively. They wrote that "natural born" had a longstanding definition dating back to colonial times.

British common law recognized that children born outside of the British Empire remained subjects, and were described by law as "natural born," Katyal and Clement wrote.

"The framers, of course, would have been intimately familiar with these statutes and the way they used terms like ‘natural born,’ since the (British) statutes were binding law in the colonies before the Revolutionary War,’" they said.

Additionally, the first Congress of the United States passed the Naturalization Act of 1790, just three years after the Constitution was written, which stated that children born abroad to U.S. citizens were, too, natural born citizens. Many members of the inaugural Congress were also authors of the Constitution.

Incidentally, this isn’t the first time the qualifications of a candidate have come into question. George Romney, the father of Mitt Romney who ran for president as a Republican in 1968, was born in Mexico. Barry Goldwater, the 1964 GOP presidential nominee, was born in Arizona before it was a state. Neither candidate’s campaign was derailed by citizenship challenges.

More recently, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., faced questions about his eligibility because he was born in the Panama Canal Zone while his father was stationed there.

Interestingly, McCain’s potential Democratic opponents — Obama and then-Sen. Hillary Clinton — co-sponsored a Senate measure to settle McCain’s eligibility. The April 2008 resolution said, "John Sidney McCain, III, is a 'natural born Citizen' under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States." It passed unanimously.

The Supreme Court’s silence

The reason a question still remains even after Romney, Goldwater and McCain is because the Supreme Court — the ultimate arbiter of constitutional questions — has never directly ruled on the citizenship provision for presidential office holders. And that means a note of uncertainty remains.

Some have unsuccessfully challenged the qualifications of presidential contenders, but courts have been reluctant to address the issue. Several citizens filed lawsuits asking the court to rule on whether McCain was a natural born citizen early in 2008, but the legal challenges didn’t go anywhere.

"We know from the McCain lawsuits, courts don’t want to touch this," said Sarah Duggin, a professor of law at Catholic University who has researched this issue extensively. "It very well may be that the courts would refuse to go near this. There are so many issues."

[VIDEO]Is Ted Cruz, born in Canada, eligible to run for president? (Updated)

The new analysis by Harvard alum Katyal is an obfuscating opinion that was designed so Harvard alum Cruz can run but it is not accurate with the founders original intent. Like when he references the 1790 Act, he leaves out the important wording:

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."

Katyal and Clement omits the father’s residency is the key determining factor in granting citizenship. Not just the status of “a parent, as the Harvard writers allege, but that of the male parent.

Cruz is a citizen. Get a life

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Idiot. Being a Citizen is not enough to satisfy Article 2 Section 1. You have to be a natural-born Citizen.

Yes being a natural born citizen does.

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

But not a Citizen. You are conflating the two.

Think the Tin foil hat is on you to tight

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

 

[Cecilie1200]

The repealing of the 1790 Naturalization Act tells you all you need to know about the definition of Natural Born Citizen and the Framers' intent.

Even Geraldo gets it as he schools Hannity and Laura Ingraham.
Geraldo: Trump Is Right Ted Cruz May Not be a Natural Born Citizen





naturalization laws 1790-1795

1790 Naturalization Act:
"..And 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..."

1795 Naturalization Act:
"...the children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as citizens of the United States..."

Y'know what information MIGHT be helpful to you? Something a bit more current than 1795. Like, for instance, the actual laws in effect when Ted Cruz was born.

Leave the 18th century and live in the glorious now.

 

[Cecilie1200]

What does it mean to be a "natural born citizen"?

Granny says naturally it means...

... ya's born here inna USA.

Then Granny's a fucking moron.

The United States has millions of its citizens living overseas for various reasons, including work and military service. It does not reject the children of its citizens simply because they were traveling abroad.

 

[Cecilie1200]

What does it mean to be a "natural born citizen"?

Most legal experts contend it means someone is a citizen from birth and doesn’t have to go through a naturalization process to become a citizen.

If that’s the definition, then Cruz is a natural born citizen by being born to an American mother and having her citizenship at birth. The Congressional Research Service, the agency tasked with providing authoritative research to all members of Congress, published a report after the 2008 election supporting the thinking that "natural born" citizenship means citizenship held "at birth."

There are many legal and historical precedents to strongly back up this argument, experts have said.

Those precedents were the subject of a recent op-ed in the Harvard Law Review by two former solicitor generals of opposing parties, Neal Katyal and Paul Clement, who worked for Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush, respectively. They wrote that "natural born" had a longstanding definition dating back to colonial times.

British common law recognized that children born outside of the British Empire remained subjects, and were described by law as "natural born," Katyal and Clement wrote.

"The framers, of course, would have been intimately familiar with these statutes and the way they used terms like ‘natural born,’ since the (British) statutes were binding law in the colonies before the Revolutionary War,’" they said.

Additionally, the first Congress of the United States passed the Naturalization Act of 1790, just three years after the Constitution was written, which stated that children born abroad to U.S. citizens were, too, natural born citizens. Many members of the inaugural Congress were also authors of the Constitution.

Incidentally, this isn’t the first time the qualifications of a candidate have come into question. George Romney, the father of Mitt Romney who ran for president as a Republican in 1968, was born in Mexico. Barry Goldwater, the 1964 GOP presidential nominee, was born in Arizona before it was a state. Neither candidate’s campaign was derailed by citizenship challenges.

More recently, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., faced questions about his eligibility because he was born in the Panama Canal Zone while his father was stationed there.

Interestingly, McCain’s potential Democratic opponents — Obama and then-Sen. Hillary Clinton — co-sponsored a Senate measure to settle McCain’s eligibility. The April 2008 resolution said, "John Sidney McCain, III, is a 'natural born Citizen' under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States." It passed unanimously.

The Supreme Court’s silence

The reason a question still remains even after Romney, Goldwater and McCain is because the Supreme Court — the ultimate arbiter of constitutional questions — has never directly ruled on the citizenship provision for presidential office holders. And that means a note of uncertainty remains.

Some have unsuccessfully challenged the qualifications of presidential contenders, but courts have been reluctant to address the issue. Several citizens filed lawsuits asking the court to rule on whether McCain was a natural born citizen early in 2008, but the legal challenges didn’t go anywhere.

"We know from the McCain lawsuits, courts don’t want to touch this," said Sarah Duggin, a professor of law at Catholic University who has researched this issue extensively. "It very well may be that the courts would refuse to go near this. There are so many issues."

[VIDEO]Is Ted Cruz, born in Canada, eligible to run for president? (Updated)

The new analysis by Harvard alum Katyal is an obfuscating opinion that was designed so Harvard alum Cruz can run but it is not accurate with the founders original intent. Like when he references the 1790 Act, he leaves out the important wording:

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."

Katyal and Clement omits the father’s residency is the key determining factor in granting citizenship. Not just the status of “a parent, as the Harvard writers allege, but that of the male parent.

Cruz is a citizen. Get a life

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Idiot. Being a Citizen is not enough to satisfy Article 2 Section 1. You have to be a natural-born Citizen.

Yes being a natural born citizen does.

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

But not a Citizen. You are conflating the two.

Nope. A natural-born citizen is one who was born into citizenship, rather than naturalized. Ted Cruz has been a US citizen since his birth. No naturalization required.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Saw this:

So a guy from Arabia comes here, has a baby, takes the baby back to Arabia, it grows up, has 20 children and all 20 are US Citizens? And all their children are US Citizens?

Could it happen?

The child is. His children? Probably not.

 

[Cecilie1200]

How many times must this be debunked before some reason sets in?

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

If you're waiting for reason and common sense to break out in this country, I hope you're not holding your breath.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

The new analysis by Harvard alum Katyal is an obfuscating opinion that was designed so Harvard alum Cruz can run but it is not accurate with the founders original intent. Like when he references the 1790 Act, he leaves out the important wording:

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."

Katyal and Clement omits the father’s residency is the key determining factor in granting citizenship. Not just the status of “a parent, as the Harvard writers allege, but that of the male parent.

Cruz is a citizen. Get a life

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Idiot. Being a Citizen is not enough to satisfy Article 2 Section 1. You have to be a natural-born Citizen.

Yes being a natural born citizen does.

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

But not a Citizen. You are conflating the two.

Nope. A natural-born citizen is one who was born into citizenship, rather than naturalized. Ted Cruz has been a US citizen since his birth. No naturalization required.

Article 2 Section 1 specifically calls for a natural born Citizen, not a Citizen. Ted was naturalized by US Code 1401 via the 14th Amendment. No where is the term natural born Citizen located in the 14th Amendment. The father of the 14th Amendment, Representative John Bingham, defined a natural born Citizen as this:

I find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural-born citizen.”
From The Congressional Globe, 1866, pg 1291, second column
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/...


Cruz's father Rafael owed allegiance to a foreign sovereignty. Ted is a Citizen, not a natural-born Citizen.

 

[Syriusly]

Cruz is a citizen. Get a life

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Idiot. Being a Citizen is not enough to satisfy Article 2 Section 1. You have to be a natural-born Citizen.

Yes being a natural born citizen does.

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

But not a Citizen. You are conflating the two.

Nope. A natural-born citizen is one who was born into citizenship, rather than naturalized. Ted Cruz has been a US citizen since his birth. No naturalization required.

Article 2 Section 1 specifically calls for a natural born Citizen, not a Citizen. Ted was naturalized by US Code 1401 via the 14th Amendment. No where is the term natural born Citizen located in the 14th Amendment. The father of the 14th Amendment, Representative John Bingham, defined a natural born Citizen as this:

I find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural-born citizen.”
From The Congressional Globe, 1866, pg 1291, second column
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/...


Cruz's father Rafael owed allegiance to a foreign sovereignty. Ted is a Citizen, not a natural-born Citizen.

Of course Cruz is a natural born citizen.

But it is fun watching Trump- and his racist supporters claim otherwise.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Cruz is a citizen. Get a life

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Idiot. Being a Citizen is not enough to satisfy Article 2 Section 1. You have to be a natural-born Citizen.

Yes being a natural born citizen does.

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

But not a Citizen. You are conflating the two.

Nope. A natural-born citizen is one who was born into citizenship, rather than naturalized. Ted Cruz has been a US citizen since his birth. No naturalization required.

Article 2 Section 1 specifically calls for a natural born Citizen, not a Citizen. Ted was naturalized by US Code 1401 via the 14th Amendment. No where is the term natural born Citizen located in the 14th Amendment. The father of the 14th Amendment, Representative John Bingham, defined a natural born Citizen as this:

I find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural-born citizen.”
From The Congressional Globe, 1866, pg 1291, second column
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/...


Cruz's father Rafael owed allegiance to a foreign sovereignty. Ted is a Citizen, not a natural-born Citizen.

Ted was not "naturalized". He was a citizen at birth. Whether or not a nation changes how it determines natural-born citizens is irrelevant to that fact. You seem to imagine that the definition of natural-born citizen is some universal law, like physics, that stands above and apart the laws of men, when it is nothing BUT the laws of men and how they choose to view an individual.

I don't give a piss in a windstorm what John Bingham did or didn't think back in the 19th century. Laws change, as has this one. And to imagine that this one thing is somehow immutable by law is absurd.

I also don't give a piss in a windstorm about what Ted's father did or didn't do. It's irrelevant to Ted himself. If his father ever runs for President, then we will visit the question of HIS loyalties at that time.

US Code 1401 does not "naturalize" citizens like Ted Cruz. It recognizes them as citizens at birth, aka natural-born citizens. I defy you to find any interpretation or application of the law that says differently. And there are plenty of examples to search through, since this question is addressed daily on behalf of the children of the millions of American citizens who live and work abroad at any given moment.

 

[boilermaker55]

Damn birthers. When it fits to ridicule and take up valuable government time and issues to prove your point about the sitting President. It was fine. Now its your "boy" , its, let it go.
Hypocrites!

The repealing of the 1790 Naturalization Act tells you all you need to know about the definition of Natural Born Citizen and the Framers' intent.

Even Geraldo gets it as he schools Hannity and Laura Ingraham.
Geraldo: Trump Is Right Ted Cruz May Not be a Natural Born Citizen





naturalization laws 1790-1795

1790 Naturalization Act:
"..And 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..."

1795 Naturalization Act:
"...the children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as citizens of the United States..."

I don't support the guy, or the country he comes from. However the question should be, does he have any conflicts of interest with another country? The answer appears to be no. He's American, always has been. So why not move on to important issues? (well I supposed the Republicans aren't really talking about important issues at all).

 

[Cecilie1200]

Damn birthers. When it fits to ridicule and take up valuable government time and issues to prove your point about the sitting President. It was fine. Now its your "boy" , its, let it go.
Hypocrites!

The repealing of the 1790 Naturalization Act tells you all you need to know about the definition of Natural Born Citizen and the Framers' intent.

Even Geraldo gets it as he schools Hannity and Laura Ingraham.
Geraldo: Trump Is Right Ted Cruz May Not be a Natural Born Citizen





naturalization laws 1790-1795

1790 Naturalization Act:
"..And 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..."

1795 Naturalization Act:
"...the children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as citizens of the United States..."

I don't support the guy, or the country he comes from. However the question should be, does he have any conflicts of interest with another country? The answer appears to be no. He's American, always has been. So why not move on to important issues? (well I supposed the Republicans aren't really talking about important issues at all).

Yes, because all situations are exactly alike, and the only POSSIBLE difference is whether or not we "like" the man in question.

Retard.

 

[Eaglewings]

The repealing of the 1790 Naturalization Act tells you all you need to know about the definition of Natural Born Citizen and the Framers' intent.

Even Geraldo gets it as he schools Hannity and Laura Ingraham.
Geraldo: Trump Is Right Ted Cruz May Not be a Natural Born Citizen





naturalization laws 1790-1795

1790 Naturalization Act:
"..And 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..."

1795 Naturalization Act:
"...the children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as citizens of the United States..."

Cruz knows, he just thinks everyone else is dumb and won't get ..

 

[Syriusly]

Damn birthers. When it fits to ridicule and take up valuable government time and issues to prove your point about the sitting President. It was fine. Now its your "boy" , its, let it go.
Hypocrites!

The repealing of the 1790 Naturalization Act tells you all you need to know about the definition of Natural Born Citizen and the Framers' intent.

Even Geraldo gets it as he schools Hannity and Laura Ingraham.
Geraldo: Trump Is Right Ted Cruz May Not be a Natural Born Citizen





naturalization laws 1790-1795

1790 Naturalization Act:
"..And 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..."

1795 Naturalization Act:
"...the children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as citizens of the United States..."

I don't support the guy, or the country he comes from. However the question should be, does he have any conflicts of interest with another country? The answer appears to be no. He's American, always has been. So why not move on to important issues? (well I supposed the Republicans aren't really talking about important issues at all).

Yes, because all situations are exactly alike, and the only POSSIBLE difference is whether or not we "like" the man in question.

Retard.

For a lot of Birthers that is exactly the issue.

For racists, like Stevie the Racist, he is consistent- he thinks that latino's and black's don't belong in the White House.

But most of the Obama Birthers are silent when it comes to Ted Cruz- because for most of them- eligibility only matters when it applies to Barack Obama.

WND- which is like RWNJ/Birther central has promoted every whacky Obama Birther meme it could flog- announced that they didn't care about Cruz's eligibility

So if anyone has the right and the duty to weigh in on Ted Cruz’s eligibility, it’s me – even though no one is asking.
My answer is, “I don’t care.”

I don’t care because the Constitution was not written and ratified to be applied to some and not others. If no one cared about Obama’s questionable eligibility, despite his shocking lack of transparency and thin paper trail, then they have no business questioning Ted Cruz – who has released his birth certificate, renounced his Canadian citizenship and upheld every provision of the Constitution to the best of his ability throughout his life.

 

[bendog]

Good thing those ain't law nomore. LOL

 

[Skylar]

Just found this gem from James Madison:

It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other.

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 2: James Madison, House of Representatives

Establishing that in 1789 at least, location of birth was king in determining allegiance and therefore, citizenship.

 

[Wilbur Right]

Saw this:

So a guy from Arabia comes here, has a baby, takes the baby back to Arabia, it grows up, has 20 children and all 20 are US Citizens? And all their children are US Citizens?

Could it happen?

Not only are they citizens, they are natural born and eligible to be POtUS.

According to some on here anyway.

All it takes is one American parent and the child can be born anywhere and then they can become President.

Dont believe the framers intended it that way. But some on here believe it is that way.

Lots of people are wrong about shit on here though.

 

[bendog]

I doubt the framers envisioned an American married to a Cuban exile living in Canada, or an American living in Hawaii married to a .... Kenyan muslm Marxist socialist. (--: Or an American born in Panama on a permanent US military base.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Idiot. Being a Citizen is not enough to satisfy Article 2 Section 1. You have to be a natural-born Citizen.

Yes being a natural born citizen does.

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

But not a Citizen. You are conflating the two.

Nope. A natural-born citizen is one who was born into citizenship, rather than naturalized. Ted Cruz has been a US citizen since his birth. No naturalization required.

Article 2 Section 1 specifically calls for a natural born Citizen, not a Citizen. Ted was naturalized by US Code 1401 via the 14th Amendment. No where is the term natural born Citizen located in the 14th Amendment. The father of the 14th Amendment, Representative John Bingham, defined a natural born Citizen as this:

I find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural-born citizen.”
From The Congressional Globe, 1866, pg 1291, second column
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/...


Cruz's father Rafael owed allegiance to a foreign sovereignty. Ted is a Citizen, not a natural-born Citizen.

Ted was not "naturalized". He was a citizen at birth. Whether or not a nation changes how it determines natural-born citizens is irrelevant to that fact. You seem to imagine that the definition of natural-born citizen is some universal law, like physics, that stands above and apart the laws of men, when it is nothing BUT the laws of men and how they choose to view an individual.

I don't give a piss in a windstorm what John Bingham did or didn't think back in the 19th century. Laws change, as has this one. And to imagine that this one thing is somehow immutable by law is absurd.

I also don't give a piss in a windstorm about what Ted's father did or didn't do. It's irrelevant to Ted himself. If his father ever runs for President, then we will visit the question of HIS loyalties at that time.

US Code 1401 does not "naturalize" citizens like Ted Cruz. It recognizes them as citizens at birth, aka natural-born citizens. I defy you to find any interpretation or application of the law that says differently. And there are plenty of examples to search through, since this question is addressed daily on behalf of the children of the millions of American citizens who live and work abroad at any given moment.

Please cite where the wording 'natural-born Citizen' is located in the 14th Amendment.

 

[Wilbur Right]

I doubt the framers envisioned an American married to a Cuban exile living in Canada, or an American living in Hawaii married to a .... Kenyan muslm Marxist socialist. (--: Or an American born in Panama on a permanent US military base.

I think they envisioned that IF a person born out of this country yet born to two American parents, that this child would be considered natural born.

One American parent has a child outside of the country, the kid is a citizen but not a natural born citizen.

Or maybe the framers intended that a natural born citizen not be born by c section.

Hows that for natural born?

I believe McCain has 2 American citizen parents.
Obama was born in the USA to one American parent.

ted has a problem. He aint natural born.
Hell ted doesnt seem very natural about anything. He is weird.