Liquid Reigns
Silver Member
- Feb 7, 2016
- 1,318
- 116
- 95
- Banned
- #281
Puerto Ricans are granted US Citizenship at birth via the 1917 Act, yet they are not "natural-born citizens". Puerto Rico is a Territory we are its protectorates, even though they are granted US Citizenship at birth, they are not eligible to hold the office of the Presidency.Look to the 1917 Jones–Shafroth Act and the court case of Balzac v. Puerto RicoThe Constitution didn't define "citizen" until the 14th Amendment. Prior to that there was no definition of citizen, at all, in it, only that citizens were entitled to to the rights guaranteed by the Constitution.Nay I say NewEnglander! Although ye be in the correct area ye are incorect!
The definition was removed but not changed.
The meaning of of the term Natural Born Citizen as described by the founding fathers still stands. No amendment has been ratified to describe or update a new meaning therfore the definition has not changed.
The intent of the law still stands.
The Term Natural Born Citizen is still a requirement. One is not allowed by law to redefine its meaning simply because the definition was removed in error.(or even intentionally)
You may NOT read into it any way you please. When looking for the founding fathers defination you only need to know their defination. Clearly it can be found in the Public acts of the first congress 2nd session chapter III March 26, 1790.
The definition is legal untill the Constitution is ammended and a new defination is installed. If that ever happens.
Since the term "Natural Born Citizen" was not defined IN the Constitution, the term means what it was then understood to mean. The Constitution clearly made distinctions between citizens (a) from birth and (b) those over whom Congress was given the ability to provide-for by way of its naturalization authority.
Congress was granted that sole authority. “[E]stablish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,” U. S. Const., Art. I, §8, cl. 4.
That fact is not disputable. And in reality neither is the inherent power of the United States, as sovereign, to control and conduct relations with foreign nations.
Where, as here, one is a citizen, one is either BORN a citizen or one needs to have become a citizen via the lawful process of "naturalization." Ted Cruz did not have to go through any process of naturalization because he was a United States' citizen at birth, given his mother's U.S. citizenship at the moment of his birth.
If a citizen but not naturalized, that only leaves the only other option: he was a citizen at birth. Thus, Ted Cruz IS a natural born United States' citizen. Like it or not, that's the end of that story.
Puerto Ricans are born Citizens at birth, they do not have to go through a naturalization process, and yet they are not eligible to hold the office of the President, why is that?
Ted Cruzs citizenship was dependent upon his parent(s) meeting certain requirements, and then for "Ted" himself meeting certain requirements (1952 INA Section 301 (a)(7) and (a)(7)(b)) in order to retain his citizenship. Cruz was a "conditional citizen" provided requirements were met. He is not a "natural-born citizen". Justice Gray in the Wong Kim Ark Opinion limited the term to mean only you are either born in the US (with few exceptions, i.e. Ambassador/Diplomat - in service of your government, invading army, born in international waters) or you are Naturalized.
To be "naturalized" doesn't infer you must go through a process to gain citizenship.
So are Puerto Ricans naturalized citizens?
So they don't say- and you don't know.