TED CRUZ is a Naturalized Alien -- not a Natural Born Citizen. That would seem to be the evidence of the law under which he was admitted to the United States {Public Law 89-236 of October 3, 1965}. The relevant parts being:
Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assenibled^ That section 201 of immigration and the Immigration and Nationality Act (66 Stat. 176; 8 U.S.C. 1151):
"SEC. 201. (a) Exclusive of special immigrants defined in section 101(a) (27), and of the immediate relatives of United States citizens specified in subsection (b) of this section, the number of aliens who may be issued immigrant visas or who may otherwise acquire the status of an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence...
"(b) The 'immediate relatives' referred to in subsection (a) of this section shall mean the children, spouses, and parents of a citizen of the United States: ... The immediate relatives specified in this subsection who are otherwise qualified for admission as immigrants shall be admitted as such,...
THUS, as a "relative", specifically, the son of an American citizen, the alien (Canadian Born Citizen) child, Ted Cruz, entered the USA as a permanent resident.
NOTE: Rafael Edward "Ted" Cruz was born December 22, 1970 and accordingly was fully subject to the terms of the law as it went into full effect in 1968 -- two years prior to his birth. His mother being the one to file under:
"SEC. 204. (a) Any citizen of the United States claiming that an alien is entitled to a preference status by reason of the relationships described in paragraphs (1), (4), or (5) of section 203(a), or to an immediate relative status under section 201(b),...
"(b) After an investigation of the facts in each case, and after consultation with the Secretary of Labor with respect to petitions to accord a status under section 203(a) (3) or (6), the Attorney General shall, if he determines that the facts stated in the petition are true and that the alien in behalf of whom the petition is made is an immediate relative specified in section 201 (b) or is eligible for a preference status under section 203(a), approve the petition and forward one copy thereof to the Department of State.
As we see in section (b) the approved filing would be a document held by both the State Department and Attorney General. In theory, as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton would have had "easy access" to that document and would have been able to use it if the Republicans had been stupid enough to nominate Ted Cruz instead of Donald Trump. In addition, Trump appears to have alluded its existence when he warned Cruz during the First Debate.
The real fun is that Congress also has, or legally should have, the document:
"(d) The Attorney; General shall forward to the Congress a report on each approved petition for immigrant status under sections 203(a) (3) or 203(a) ...
That would indicate the Republicans are aware Cruz is running a campaign donation scam -- obviously, the Democrats wouldn't care, since the scam specifically targets and fleeces Republican donors with the full permission of the Republican leadership.
There are post-1986 rules which do not apply to Cruz, who is classified under: "One parent is a U.S. citizen at the time of birth and the birthdate is on or after November 14, 1986"
Instead, he would come under: "The genetic ...legal mother is a U.S. citizen at the time of birth, and the birth date is after December 23, 1952
7 FAM 1131.2 Prerequisites for Transmitting U.S. Citizenship (CT:CON-636; 02-24-2016)
Since 1790, there have been two prerequisites for transmitting U.S. citizenship at birth to children born abroad:
(1) At least one biological parent must have been a U.S. citizen when the child was born. The only exception is for a posthumous child.
(2) The U.S. citizen parent(s) must have resided or been physically present in the United States for the time required by the law in effect when the child was born.
Item (2) is historically dominant and there is a question as to whether or not the mother of Ted Cruz meets the pre-birth requirement, which, under some statutory laws, covers all or part of the year in which gestation began. Cruz's mother became pregnant while a legal resident and business owner in Canada.
7 FAM 1131.6-2 Not Citizens by “Naturalization”
(CT:CON-636; 02-24-2016)
Section 201(g) NA and section 301g) INA (8 U.S.C. 1401(g)) (formerly 301(a)(7) INA) both specify that naturalization is "the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth." Accordingly, U.S. citizens who acquire U.S. citizenship at birth by birth abroad to a U.S. citizen parent(s) are not considered "naturalized" citizens under either act.
Problem: "Until the Act of October 10, 1978, persons who had acquired U.S. citizenship through birth outside of the United States to one U.S. citizen parent had to meet certain physical presence requirements to retain their citizenship." Cruz was born during the period of required physical presence and was a Canadian Resident for the first FOUR years of his life. BY LAW, Cruz's dual national status, and its retention for 43 years or more, disqualifies him for certain Security Clearance levels -- all of which are lower than that which must be available to a sitting POTUS. Cruz has publically claimed to have "learned" of his Canadian birth and citizenship when he was about 18 years old and applied for a US Passport.
Therefore he knowing decided to retain the second citizenship for a quarter century. Since the draft had ened by the time Cruz was brought into the United States, dual status retention could not have been affected by a desire to "Draft Dodge" -- though it might have been associated with escape from charges arising from the intent to commit fraud or some criminal act.
Section I of the 1934 Citizenship Act added the provision that children of American mothers, as well as of American fathers, were entitled to become United States citizens through inheritance -- that is, in legalese, the children were to be Americans jure sanguinis.
The law which most closely applies to Cruz would be the one enacted in 1952. However, the "Bottom Line" -- or as they said in our Law office meetings back in the 60's and 70's, "The Answer Is" -- Cruz is, without a doubt, entitled to American citizenship from birth; he might well have met all the requirements for that citizenship and therefore is entitled to the Senate office he now holds. BUT, and there is always a BUT, his entitlement is by statute. Moreover, the law which he falls under did not exist before 1934, when the children of female citizens were given the right to jure sanguinis status.
Statutory and legislative status is, it could be argued, NOT the same as Natural Born Status. As a matter of legislative reality, Congress could pass a law, which the POTUS could sign, giving full citizenship to everyone in the world -- everyone holding human DNA. That would not suddenly make them "Natural Born Citizens" -- it would just make them citizens under an idea similar to the one which created jure sanguinis status.
While there are those who would scarf at the idea of a global citizenship, it is the idea put forward in Star Trek and other sci-fi works where there are earth beings and aliens and the earth is under a single government. It is also the basis of Christian and Islamic Belief -- the idea that the day will come when "The Messiah" will unify the planet and establish a single government. All that means is that one government establishes a law which dictates that all other people are its citizens. But, unfortunately, there are those who don't get it ... they believe Obama was born in Kenya and "magically" lost the same legal rights afforded Cruz.
OBVIOUSLY, since President Barack Obama was born 4 August 1961, this 1965 immigration statute could not be applied to him. However, since he was born in Hawaii, and therefore is a Natural Born Citizen of a State, the immigration statutes are irrelevant.
However, as there have been Republican claims of a false Birth Certificate -- notably made by Donald Trump in 2012, and others over the past half-decade -- it is relevant that Barack Obama Sr applied for an extension of his VISA in August 1961; in it, he asserted the birth of his son. That assertion would have triggered the need to provide proof of birth, and that would be available through an FOIA request for the VISA Records for Obama Sr.
NOTE: There could be no objection to the proof of birth being included, since President Obama has authorized the release of his Birth Certificate -- which, presumably, is the same document his father provided to INS. Even if it were not, evidence of a legally accepted document, even it was partially redacted, would prove birth and Natural Born Citizenship status.
Given that the Obama Administration draws to a close at the beginning of January 2017, the BIRTHER focus on Obama serves no purpose other than to provide a possible nullification of his eight years and set the stage for a unique and fully destructive Constitutional Crisis which would bring all his Presidential actions into legal question.
No comments:
Post a Comment