View Full Version : Is Rafael Cruz a US citizen?
EE_
6th January 2016, 05:28 PM
They say he is?
So Cruz's parents are US citizens and Rafael was born in Canada...that makes him a natural born US citizen.
Now, two Mexican parents visiting the US have a baby in the US, that baby is a US citizen?
Why is their baby not a natural born Mexican citizen? Or do they get to pick?
What is Mexico's law on citizenship?
What about Chinese parents?
palani
6th January 2016, 05:48 PM
Jus soli ... citizenship by virtue of the PLACE you were born ... recognized by the U.S.
Jus sanguinis ... citizenship by virtue of the BLOOD you were born to (or of) .. recognized by the U.S.
Natural born ... in the vernacular of the time ... a child born of an unwed mother ... a bastard.
All U.S. presidents are required to be bastards ... and that is pretty much they way they operate.
I bet the author(s) of the U.S. constitution got a real kick out of including 'natural born' in their document. Masters of distraction and misdirection all.
palani
6th January 2016, 05:53 PM
http://oi63.tinypic.com/jg1aol.jpg
palani
6th January 2016, 05:55 PM
http://oi66.tinypic.com/2ymc5z8.jpg
Ponce
6th January 2016, 06:27 PM
Like myself, he is not a "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN"...born in the USA....what's so hard to understand?
V
JohnQPublic
6th January 2016, 06:38 PM
Attorney Taitz gives an interview to US News and World Report on lack of eligibility of Ted Cruz for the US Presidency (http://beforeitsnews.com/obama-birthplace-controversy/2016/01/attorney-taitz-gives-an-interview-to-us-news-and-world-report-on-lack-of-eligibility-of-ted-cruz-for-the-us-presidency-2497964.html)
"Attorney Orly Taitz gave an interview to Steven Nelson, political reporter of US News and World Report. She was asked about eligibility of Ted Cruz for US Presidency. She stated that the US President is supposed to be a Natural Born Citizen.
The Constitution does not explain what Natural Born means. In such instances the courts have to look at the meaning based on statements of the framers of the constitution and the meaning used at the time the constitution was written.
According to a letter of John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to John Washington, Jay stated that the President has to be a Natural born citizen in order to prevent foreign nationals from becoming the Commander in Chief. At a time the framers of the Constitution used the legal encyclopedia ” The law of Nations” by Emer De Vattel, which defined Natural born citizen as one who is born in the country to citizens.
At the time Cruz was born, his father was a citizen of Cuba, he was not a US citizen and Cruz inherited Cuban citizenship from him.
Additionally, Cruz had a Canadian citizenship based on his birth in Canada. It appears that his mother got Canadian citizenship as well. Taitz advised Nelson that Rubio has the same problem, as at the time he was born, both of his parents were citizens of Cuba and did not have the US citizenship. (Additional note: Congressman Grayson claims that there is no evidence of Cruz’s mother being born in the US. Interestingly enough a number of investigators advised Taitz that they could not find any evidence of divorces of Cruz’s parents from their prior spouses before Ted Cruz’s birth as well)"
JohnQPublic
6th January 2016, 06:39 PM
I have been thinking about this. I was wondering when it would start-up.
JohnQPublic
6th January 2016, 06:42 PM
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-01-06/congressman-readies-ted-cruz-eligibility-lawsuit-with-eye-on-mom
Horn
6th January 2016, 06:52 PM
Like myself, he is not a "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN"...born in the USA....what's so hard to understand?
V
McCain was a Panamanian just like you too, you're presidential material Ponce! :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShjlAiIM3Sg
Spectrism
6th January 2016, 07:08 PM
I am shocked to see supposed conservatives argue that Cruz is OK. They are being absolutely stupid. Cruz is NOT a natural born citizen... nor is Rubio.
Cruz is another deceiver... plain and simple to me. He speaks nice words but when he is against the constitution by running for president, I cannot believe he is in favor of supporting the constitution.
palani
6th January 2016, 07:22 PM
Here ... hope this helps some
U.S. v. Valentine, 288 F.Supp. 958, 980 (1968)
"...The only absolute and unqualified right of [ U.S.] citizenship is to residence within territorial boundaries of United States; a citizen cannot be either deported or denied re-entry..."
vacuum
6th January 2016, 07:32 PM
At the time Cruz was born, his father was a citizen of Cuba, he was not a US citizen and Cruz inherited Cuban citizenship from him.
Additionally, Cruz had a Canadian citizenship based on his birth in Canada. It appears that his mother got Canadian citizenship as well. Taitz advised Nelson that Rubio has the same problem, as at the time he was born, both of his parents were citizens of Cuba and did not have the US citizenship. (Additional note: Congressman Grayson claims that there is no evidence of Cruz’s mother being born in the US. Interestingly enough a number of investigators advised Taitz that they could not find any evidence of divorces of Cruz’s parents from their prior spouses before Ted Cruz’s birth as well)"
So Cruz has or had 3 different citizenships?
palani
6th January 2016, 07:35 PM
If Cruz's status is determined by the status of his mother ... this is the same as the Roman rule established for animals that are owned. In the case of a freeman the status is determined by the father. In this case if the father was Cuban then so is Cruz although he should be able to claim Canadian citizenship as well by jus soli.
https://books.google.com/books?id=5K5IAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA68&lpg=PA68&dq=rights+follow+the+condition+of+the+father+this+ is+the+rule+among+free+men&source=bl&ots=kn3s2zfx-w&sig=xtCvCjbf4btjn2aQ7_aSp3iVYp4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwispa6-0pbKAhWIKCYKHbqJD0oQ6AEILDAC#v=onepage&q=rights%20follow%20the%20condition%20of%20the%20f ather%20this%20is%20the%20rule%20among%20free%20me n&f=false
In the case of the United States v. Sanders (Hempst., 486) the court held that the quantum of Indian blood in the veins did not determine the condition of the offspring of a union between a white person and an Indian; but further held that the condition of the mother did determine the question. And the court referred to the common law as authority for the position that the condition of the mother fixed the status of the offspring. The court is sustained in the first position by the common law, and also in the last position, if applied to the offspring of a connection between a freeman and a slave, upon the principle handed down from the Roman civil law, that theowner of a female animal is entitled to all her brood, according to the maxim partus sequitur ventrem. But by the common law this rule is reversed with regard to the offspring of free persons. Their offspring follows the condition of the fater, and the rule partus sequitur patrem prevails in determining their status. (1 Bouviers Institutes, 198, sec. 502; 31 Barb. 486; 2 Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 147; Shanks v Dupont, 3 Pet., 242.) This is the universal maxim of the common law with regard to freemen, as old as the common law, or even as the Roman civil law, and as well settled as the rule partus sequitur ventrem, the one being a rule fixing the status of freemen, the other being a rule defining the ownership of property; the one applicable to different political communities or states, whose citizens are in the enjoyment of the civil rights possessed by people in a state of freedom, the other defining the condition of the offspring which had been tainted by the bondage of the mother.
palani
6th January 2016, 08:03 PM
This is the rule of a board established by the Secretary of State circa 1906 (from the same google book cited previously).
http://oi65.tinypic.com/orj9zn.jpg
Note that using this rule Obama fails the citizenship issue based upon blood (jus sanguinis)
Ponce
6th January 2016, 08:29 PM
Well, mother was a Georgia Peach........ but ........that does not make me a "natural born"... even thou I did spend five years in the US without going out of the country before my 18 birthday........did he even do that?..... that's one rule that must be followed.
V
palani
6th January 2016, 08:46 PM
Ponce
That google book I cited has a section on Cuban citizenship as well. Seems the panel they set up went around the world looking at the citizenship requirements of most if not all of the countries existing in 1906.
You don't lose the cloth of citizenship by moving to another country. In many cases you can lose it by joining the military of another country though.
Ponce
6th January 2016, 10:34 PM
I know palani.......I have taken "vacations" is five diferent countries, but lucky to never loose my US status...you can loose it if fighting for a country that's fighting the US.........in Cuba they do not recognize my US citizenship but only the Cuban one.
V
Horn
6th January 2016, 11:23 PM
.in Cuba they do not recognize my US citizenship but only the Cuban one.
V
You tried walking into Guantanamo from Cuba, or Cuba won't let you back out if you go there?
They gotta have an airport at Guantanamo, no? lol
vacuum
7th January 2016, 01:13 AM
My understanding is that pretty much the only way this can ultimately be resolved is by the SCOTUS.
We may have laws and legal conventions today that Cruz would satisfy, but citizenship laws and conventions today are irrelevant. The only thing with weight here is the original meaning of the constitution and it's amendments.
EE_
7th January 2016, 03:48 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDNRCPfcPas
Neuro
7th January 2016, 07:53 AM
So Cruz has or had 3 different citizenships?
Canada, Cuba and USA, should join Mexico in the North American Onion to simplify matters...
mick silver
7th January 2016, 07:59 AM
if Obama is so is he
palani
7th January 2016, 08:05 AM
if Obama is
I would have to defer to William Jefferson Clinton for a concept of what 'is' is.
JohnQPublic
7th January 2016, 08:08 AM
if Obama is so is he
Obama got a State (Hawaii) to issue a piece of paper that at least implied he was natural born. Not sure Cruz or Rubio will be able to do that.
I remember complaining last election cycle that the major candidates for both parties (Obama and McCain) had potential natural born citizen issues. WTF is going on here? Are both parties truly out to destroy the constitution? You are trying to tell me that the parties cannot find candidates who were born here?
Horn
7th January 2016, 08:21 AM
WTF is going on here? Are both parties truly out to destroy the constitution? You are trying to tell me that the parties cannot find candidates who were born here?
Nobody who was born in U.S. is stupid enough to want the presidency.
palani
7th January 2016, 08:58 AM
Nobody who was born in U.S. is stupid enough to want the presidency.
Relatively few people are actually born within the jurisdiction of the U.S. Were you born within the 100 square mile boundary of the stones?
http://www.boundarystones.org/images/SE1.jpg
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.