US Senator-elect Ted Cruz (R-TX), whose real name is Rafael Edward Cruz, was born on December 22, 1970 in Calgary, Canada.
Cruz was four years old before he moved, with his parents, to the United States of America. Unlike our de facto president Barack Hussein Obama II who probably only spent a number of days in Kenya before coming to the USA Cruz spent at least the first four (4) years of his life in Canada.
Cruz’s father, Rafael Cruz, was a Cuban immigrant in the United States of American during the Cuban Revolution. He came to the USA in 1957 to study at the University of Texas. However, it wasn’t until 2005 that he became a US citizen.
It appears that Cruz’s mother, Eleanor Darragh, was born in Delaware. If readers of this blog have information to contrary please do share it with us in comments section below.
Is Cruz eligible to serve as President of the United States of America? Speculation that Cruz is gearing up for a 2016 run is, and has been, developing ever since Cruz won the 2012 US Senate election and notably more so now after an October 29, 2012 speech given by Cruz in Washington, DC at the American Principles Project in which Cruz introduced a concept which he calls “Opportunity Conservatism”.
A political science professor, Brandon Rottinghaus, of the University of Houston, has weighed in regarding Cruz and the Natural Born Citizen clause saying that the sticking point comes from what the definition of a “natural born citizen” is, and whether Cruz’s Canadian birthplace is addressed by the law. “Natural born citizenship is not defined in the US Constitution,” Rottinghaus said. “The reason they didn’t is not totally clear.” Rottinghaus says that the writers of the US Constitution probably meant to include both people born on U.S. soil and those born to citizens, but ultimately left the decision to be made by the states.
UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh also weighed in citing The Nationality Act of 1940 which outlined which children became “nationals and citizens of the United States at birth.” The law stated that a person is a U.S. citizen if he or she were born in United States; born outside the U.S. to parents who were both citizens; found in the United States without parents and no proof of birth elsewhere; or if a person has been born to one American parent, provided that parent has spent a certain number of years in the United States.
Professor Volokh says that the “single-American parent requirement” has been amended a few times. As it applies to people born between 1952 and 1986, they must have a parent who was a U.S. citizen for at least 10 years, including five after the age of 14, in order for the baby to be considered a natural-born citizen.
It should be noted here that professor Volokh calls himself a friend of Cruz and has known him since the 1990s. It should also be noted here that in 2008 Volokh wrote about Barack Obama and came to the same conclusion regarding eligibility.
Peter J. Spiro, who holds the Charles Weiner Chair in international law, at Temple University says that, “Ted Cruz didn’t naturalize. He was natural at birth.”
Professor Spiro also says its possible that a person could challenge that the laws granting citizenship at birth do not define what it is to be a natural-born citizen. In fact, the phrase “natural-born citizen” is only used once in the U.S. Code — in Article 2 of the Constitution. Such a challenge would be unlikely to change the current definitions, however, Spiro says.
If you ask me, Lucas D. Smith, it appears that Rafael Edward Cruz’s birth account is reciprocal with, mirrors or at very least is much like Barack Hussein Obama’s. One notable dissimilarity is that Cruz spent at least the first four (4) years of his life outside of the United States of America (in Canada) while Obama probably only spent a number of days after his birth (in Kenya) before coming to United States of America.
Is political science professor Brandon Rottinghaus (University of Houston) correct in taking the position that the writers of the US Constitution ultimately (because they didn’t define it in the Constitution) left the decision of determining who is, and isn’t, a natural born citizen, to be made by the states?
In the summer/fall of 201o I (Lucas) participated in several telephonic discussions with the office of then Congressman John Tanner (D-TN). Tanner’s office stated, hypothetically, that if Barack Hussein Obama II was indeed born abroad (outside of the USA), to at least one US citizen parent, his US citizen parent would have to apply for (via application) his US citizenship. Tanner’s office went on to state that if the US citizen parent DID NOT make an application for citizenship before Barack Obama turned age 18 that it would then become the responsibility of Barack Obama himself to file an application for US Citizenship. Either scenario (parent application or self application) would make Barack Obama a “natural born citizen”, according to Tanner’s office.
Did the US citizen mother of Rafael Edward Cruz make application for her son’s US citizenship when she moved her son to the USA more than four (4) years after his birth? If not, did Cruz himself at any point after turning age 18 make the application for US citizenship?
In closing I will add that I if Cruz does decide to run for President 2016 I would like, and demand, to see his birth certificate.
Please exercise your free speech in the comments section below. There are no stipulations of political correctness on this blog. Speak your mind, give us your thoughts, both objective and subjective. Share your ideas, hunches, inklings or your expertise. Please provide recommendation and corrections if you spot errors in fact within the blog report. Lastly, remember that posting a comment is much like casting a vote, so please do so and thank you.
CONFUSION REIGNS SUPREME REGARDING THE PROPER DEFINITION FOR ‘NATURAL BORN CITIZEN’
From above:
(1)“Speculation that Cruz is gearing up for a 2016 run is, and has been, developing ever since Cruz won the 2012 US Senate election and notably more so now after an October 29, 2012 speech given by Cruz in Washington, DC at the American Principles Project …”
(2)“If you ask me, Lucas D. Smith, it appears that Rafael Edward Cruz’s birth account is reciprocal with, mirrors or at very least is much like Barack Hussein Obama’s. One notable dissimilarity is that Cruz spent at least the first four (4) years of his life outside of the United States of America (in Canada) while Obama probably only spent a number of days after his birth (in Kenya) before coming to United States of America.”
(3) “Tanner’s office stated, hypothetically, that if Barack Hussein Obama II was indeed born abroad (outside of the USA), to at least one US citizen parent, his US citizen parent would have to apply for (via application) his US citizenship. Tanner’s office went on to state that if the US citizen parent DID NOT make an application for citizenship before Barack Obama turned age 18 that it would then become the responsibility of Barack Obama himself to file an application for US Citizenship. Either scenario (parent application or self application) would make Barack Obama a “natural born citizen”, according to Tanner’s office.”
(4) “Natural born citizenship is not defined in the US Constitution,” Rottinghaus said. “The reason they didn’t is not totally clear.” Rottinghaus says that the writers of the US Constitution probably meant to include both people born on U.S. soil and those born to citizens, but ultimately left the decision to be made by the states.”
———————————
What a mess!
The U.S. Constitution proscribes a separation of BALANCED powers in our federal government. As I understand the situation, the drafters of the document intended for SCOTUS, at the apex of the judicial branch, to render ultimate judgements regarding interpretations of laws, especially including the Constitution itself.
The original intent of the ‘Natural Born Citizen’ clause regarding POTUS eligibility is SCREAMING now for an timely statement from SCOTUS, but it appears that SCOTUS may be compromised and therefore untrustworthy. What to do?
But then I remember, the Executive and Legislative branches are ALSO compromised and untrustworthy.
Thus, there’s really no need for worry, the BALANCE of powers in our federal government remains intact! LOL – Extreme Sarc!
Again – WHAT A MESS!
Most authorities would say that Cruz is eligible. I have certainly gone back and forth on the question of eligibility for foreign-born US citizens at birth.
I think two pieces of legislation, one British and one American shed light on the subject.
First is the British Nationality Act of 1730:
The second is the Nationality Act of 1790 (US):
In both instances persons who were subjects/citizens at birth were considered natural born citizens.
Both President Obama and Senator Cruz were subject to the same rules governing children born to a citizen and an alien. They are:
For persons born between December 24, 1952 and November 14, 1986, a person is a U.S. citizen if all of the following are true (except if born out-of-wedlock):
1.The person’s parents were married at the time of birth
2.One of the person’s parents was a U.S. citizen when the person was born
3.The citizen parent lived at least ten years in the United States before the child’s birth;
4.A minimum of 5 of these 10 years in the United States were after the citizen parent’s 14th birthday.
Had President Obama been born outside the United States, he would not have been a citizen at birth because his mother did not meet item 4 listed above. She was not quite nineteen when she gave birth to him, so she had not spent five years in the U.S. after her 14th birthday since she had not yet lived five years after her fourteenth birthday. In contrast, Senator Cruz’s mother met all four conditions at the time she gave birth, so Senator Cruz was a U.S. citizen at birth, and where he was born would be irrelevant in determining his U.S. citizenship at birth, unlike President Obama.
Now whether such a U.S. citizen at birth is or is not also a “natural-born citizen of the U.S.” is a different question which I will not address, since there is no solid precedent on the issue.
Free Republic is running a thread titled, ‘Ted Cruz draws presidential buzz, but is he eligible?‘, which was started 1/8/2013 by ‘Seizethecarp’
View the complete Free Republic thread at:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2976193/posts
The thread references a 1/7/2013 Politico article written by David Catanese – http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/cruz-draws-presidential-buzz-but-is-he-eligible-85873.html
Excerpt:
Ted Cruz may have the aura of a future presidential contender, but is he even eligible…?
The newly sworn-in Texas senator and rising Republican star was born in Canada, to a mother who was born in Delaware and Cuban father. That’s triggered a debate about whether he’s eligible for the nation’s highest office…
While there’s no legal precedent for Cruz’s situation, most constitutional scholars surveyed by POLITICO believe the 42-year-old tea party sensation would be OK.
“The problem is, no one knows what a natural born citizen is,” agreed University of California, Davis law professor Gabriel Chin, who argued in 2008 that Sen. John McCain was not eligible to be president.
Advisers to Cruz — a Harvard Law-educated appellate lawyer who has argued dozens of cases before the U.S. Supreme Court and knows a thing or two about constitutional law — say that because his mother had U.S. citizenship at the time of his birth, it transferred to him on foreign soil.
Temple University law professor Peter Spiro said Cruz has a “very strong argument” that he is indeed natural born.
While the 14th Amendment to the Constitution grants citizenship to anyone born inside the U.S., children born to American citizens outside the country attain citizenship through a law passed by Congress, according to Spiro.
“He’s a birthright citizen but his birthright citizenship derives from his parents, and the question is, does that fit with the definition of natural born citizen?” added University of Pennsylvania law professor Kermit Roosevelt. “I think it does.”
Chin, who authored a lengthy analysis on McCain’s citizenship, agreed that Cruz most likely is eligible.
Even though only Cruz’s mother was a citizen, there shouldn’t be a problem because it appears she had lived in the United States for at least 10 years, Chin said.