Supreme Court has ruled that at the time of his birth,
Senator Cruz is a NATURALIZED citizen.
And not a natural born Citizen!
“Citizenship by birth is established by the mere fact of birth under the circumstances defined in the Constitution. Every person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof becomes at once a citizen of the United States, and needs no naturalization. A person born out of the jurisdiction of the United States can only become a citizen by being naturalized, either by treaty, as in the case of the annexation of foreign territory; or by authority of Congress, exercised either by declaring certain classes of persons to be citizens, as in the enactments conferring citizenship upon foreign-born children of citizens, or by enabling foreigners individually to become citizens by proceedings in the judicial tribunals, as in the ordinary provisions of the naturalization acts.” Rogers v. Bellei 401 U.S. 815 (1971)
"The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution . . . contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two only: birth and naturalization. Citizenship by naturalization can only be acquired by naturalization under the authority and in the forms of law. But citizenship by birth is established by the mere fact of birth under the circumstances defined in the Constitution. Every person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof becomes at once a citizen of the United States, and needs no naturalization. A person born out of the jurisdiction of the United States can only become a citizen by being naturalized, either by treaty, as in the case of the annexation of foreign territory; or by authority of Congress, exercised either by declaring certain classes of persons to be citizens, as in the enactments conferring citizenship upon foreign-born children of citizens, or by enabling foreigners individually to become citizens by proceedings in the judicial tribunals, as in the ordinary provisions of the naturalization acts.” United States v. Wong Kim Ark 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
This ruling directly impugns Senator Cruz’s assertion he is a natural born Citizen. And as Texas’ Solicitor General he had to have known that this is the law of the land. The Senator cannot obfuscate this simple fact by saying, “well, the law that Bellei was born under had a residency requirement and the law I was born under did not have such a requirement.” For both Bellei and the Senator were born under an act of Congress.
What Senator Cruz has been proposing concerning his birth in Canada is that Congress can change the meaning of the words of the Constitution and exceed the powers given to Congress by the Constitution. The junior Senator from Texas has been saying that a repealed law from 1790 makes him a natural born citizen. Yet multiple Supreme Court cases say different, and have in fact declared that he is a naturalized citizen of the United States.
Senator Cruz would have us believe that the Naturalization act of 1790 was never repealed and remains the law of the land.
“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:” An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790).
The above 1790 act was put into law by the first Congress, and the next law Congress would pass concerning naturalization the 1795 act below was passed by the third Congress, which also included James Madison, the father of the Constitution, making it very difficult for someone to say that the Founding Fathers meant for the children of citizens born overseas to be natural born Citizens.
“And 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:” An act to establish an uniform rule of Naturalization; and to repeal the act heretofore passed on that subject (January 29, 1795).
This change from "natural born Citizens" to "citizens of the United States" is a proper change in the law as Congress does have power over who can be admitted as a citizen of the United States, but Congress has no power over the creation of natural born citizens. And this is the subject of a letter from Madison to Jefferson written in December of 1794 that stated “The last subject before the H. of Reps. was a Bill revising the Naturalization law, which from its defects … was exposing us to very serious inconveniences.”
The defect that Congress revised was in removing the words “considered as a natural born Citizen” and replacing them with the words “considered as citizens of the United States,” changed the landscape. Perhaps if the Senator was born 165 years earlier he might have been able to argue the point, but even that is doubtful.
It is doubtful because of another case heard by the Supreme Court in 1824 says that Congress cannot enlarge or abridge the rights of a naturalized citizen.
A naturalized citizen is indeed made a citizen under an act of Congress, but the act does not proceed to give, to regulate, or to prescribe his capacities. He becomes a member of the society, possessing all the rights of a native citizen, and standing, in the view of the Constitution, on the footing of a native. The Constitution does not authorize Congress to enlarge or abridge those rights. The simple power of the national legislature is to prescribe a uniform rule of naturalization, and the exercise of this power exhausts it so far as respects the individual. The Constitution then takes him up, and, among other rights, extends to him the capacity of suing in the courts of the United States precisely under the same circumstances under which a native might sue. He is distinguishable in nothing from a native citizen except so far as the Constitution makes the distinction. Osborn v. Bank of the United States 22 U.S. 738 (1824) and reaffirmed in Rogers v. Bellei below.
The constitution does not authorize Congress to enlarge or abridge those rights. The simple power of the national Legislature is to prescribe a uniform rule of naturalization, and the exercise of this power exhausts it so far as respects the individual. Rogers v. Bellei 401 U.S. 815 (1971)
It is simple, Congress cannot bestow upon a naturalized citizen those rights the Constitution reserves for the natural born Citizen. And what right does the Constitution reserve for the natural born? The term natural born Citizen appears in only one place in the Constitution.
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President. Constitution of the United States Article II, Section 1, Clause 5
There was once a time a naturalized person could be President, but I think September 17, 1787 is just a “tad” before the Senator was born in 1971. To hear the Senator, 184 years is just a twinkling of the eye.
Senator Cruz renounced his Canadian citizenship but that does not make him a natural born citizen retroactively, free of foreign entanglements.
(The Constitution) contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two sources only: birth and naturalization. The persons declared to be citizens are "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." The evident meaning of these last words is not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction and owing them direct and immediate allegiance. And the words relate to the time of birth in the one case, as they do to the time of naturalization in the other. Persons not thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at the time of birth cannot become so afterwards except by being naturalized, either individually, as by proceedings under the naturalization acts, or collectively, as by the force of a treaty by which foreign territory is acquired. Elk v. Wilkins 112 U.S. 94 (1884)
Because of his birth in Canada Senator Cruz is forever a naturalized citizen, trying to say he was "born a citizen", reciting repealed laws and even renouncing his Canadian citizenship cannot save him, and it is beneath the office he currently holds. He is ineligible for President and to avoid being a further disgrace to the Senate and Republican Party, he must withdraw from the remaining Republican Primary Elections and Caucuses. The Republican Party for its failure to properly vet the Senator from Texas must release the Senator’s amassed delegates to be apportioned to the valid candidates who were on the ballot at the time of said contests occurred. For even trying pass himself off as a natural born citizen when before the eyes of the world the proof is recorded in our laws, he thinks us to be idiots, and is worthy of our contempt.
At least I know why the junior Senator from Texas never took up my challenge to sue me for calling him a liar. Because he is a liar!