ron vrooman Loc: Now OR, born NV

Ted Cruz is NOT a Legal U.S. Citizen at all

© JB Williams

jb.uspu@gmail.com



The debate over whether or not Senator Ted Cruz is eligible for the U.S. Presidency is about to end. It has now been confirmed that Senator Ted Cruz is neither a “U.S. natural born Citizen” or a “legal U.S. citizen.”

According to all relative legal citizenship documentation available at present, Senator Ted Cruz was born Rafael Edward Cruz, a legal citizen of Canada on December 22, 1970 and maintained his legal Canadian citizenship from birth until May 14, 2014, 43 years later.

The Cruz Campaign for the U.S. Presidency has claimed that Senator Ted Cruz was a “citizen at birth” via his U.S. mother and a “dual citizen” of both Canada and the United States in 1970 and that by renouncing his Canadian citizenship in 2014, he would become eligible for the Oval Office.

There are several problems with this claim… which make the claim false
1.“citizen at birth” is a 14th Amendment naturalization term based upon “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”

Senator Cruz was born in Canada, subject to the jurisdiction of Canada. Further, any U.S. citizen by virtue of the 14th Amendment only, is a “citizen” and not a “natural born Citizen,” as you will see below. (Source is Cornell Law on the 14th)
1.“dual citizenship” was prohibited in Canada in December 1970. (Source is Canadian Law)



From May 22, 1868 until December 31, 1946, all residents of Canada were British subjects. There was no such thing as a Canadian citizen or Canadian citizenship until January 1, 1947.



From January 1, 1947 until February 15, 1977, Canadian law prohibited “dual citizenship.” Foreign parents giving birth to a child in Canada in 1970 were forced to choose between Canadian citizenship only, or citizenship in another country, and to declare that with Canadian officials at the time of birth. The parents of Ted Cruz chose and declared “Canadian citizenship” for Rafael Edward Cruz.


1.United States laws make it possible to be a legal U.S. citizen by only the following means…



a) NATURAL BORN CITIZEN – “As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent.” (The Natural Law as understood by the Founders in Article II of the US Constitution)



b) NATIVE BORN CITIZEN - All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. (The 14th Amendment definition for “citizen”)



c) NATURALIZED CITIZEN - the legal act or process by which a non-citizen in a country may acquire citizenship or nationality of that country. It may be done by a statute, without any effort on the part of the individual (aka anchor baby), or it may involve an application and approval by legal authorities, (such as a Consular Report of Birth Abroad (CRBA) form filed with the US State Department at the time of birth). (This includes “anchor baby” or “citizen at birth” born here or abroad, under the 14th) Source is U.S. State Department


1.“dual citizens” are prohibited from being “natural born Citizens” as it pertains to Article II requirements for the Oval Office.



As the stated purpose of the Article II “natural born Citizen” requirement for the Oval Office is to prevent anyone with foreign allegiance at birth from ever occupying the Oval Office, and all “dual citizens” at birth are born with “dual national allegiance” at birth. The mere condition of “dual citizen at birth” would be a direct violation of the known purpose and intent of the natural born Citizen requirement in Article II. Source is a letter from Founder John Jay in proposing the NBC requirement for t....

Now, Senator Ted Cruz has repeatedly stated that he has never “naturalized” to the United States, which eliminated the possibility that Ted Cruz is a “naturalized” U.S. Citizen.

Senator Ted Cruz has also documented the fact that he was not a “native born citizen” of the United States, but rather a “native born citizen” of Canada on December 22, 1970, who maintained his legal Canadian citizenship until May 14, 2014.

The Harvard opinion letter written by two of Senator Cruz’s Harvard friends, Neal Katyal & Paul Clement, a mere “commentary” on the subject, relies upon the 14th Amendment naturalized citizen at birth concept, despite the fact that Ted Cruz was not “born in or under the jurisdiction of the United States,” was never “naturalized” to the United States, and completely ignoring the fact that Canada prohibited “dual citizenship” in 1970, as well as the fact that “dual citizenship” alone would prevent him from “natural born U.S.” status.

All of this explains why Senator Ted Cruz has no legal U.S. citizenship documentation of any kind. He is not a “natural born” – “native born” or “naturalized” citizen of the United States. Because someone must be one of the three in order to be a legal citizen of the United States, Senator Ted Cruz cannot possibly be a “legal U.S. citizen” of any form.

Only days ago, a 17-year-old first time voter at a New Hampshire town hall meeting for Senator Ted Cruz asked a very reasonable question… “How and why, until recently, were you unaware that you were a Cana...

As the young man explained, this is not an eligibility question, but a credibility question… which Senator Cruz refused to answer, preferring instead to regurgitate the talking points carefully crafted by his Harvard friends and eventually, shouting the young man down, after a Cruz fan in the audience shouted “better a Canadian than a Kenyan!” (VIDEO) Meanwhile, a growing number of Constitutional Law Professors agree, “Cruz is NOT eligible.”

Of course, Senator Marco Rubio is also “ineligible,” as a “native born citizen at birth” by virtue of 14th Amendment “anchor baby” policies only.

In the end, the only possible way to consider Senator Ted Cruz eligible for the Oval Office is if every “undocumented resident alien” is eligible for the Oval Office, which I personally believe is the real agenda of both political parties, as they work to meld the USA into the global commune where there is no legal difference between “natural born Americans” and “undocumented aliens.”

The fact that so many Americans do not know or care to know the truth about the Constitutional “natural born Citizen” requirement for the Oval Office, demonstrates just how far down the road of “hope and change” for the destruction of the Constitutional Republic, the enemy within has already achieved.

Soon, “natural born Americans” will be in the American minority… and they will be ruled by foreigners who have no legal U.S. citizenship at all.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Do you think McCain is a natural born citizen?

How about children born to servicemen in Germany, Japan, South Korea, in vessels in international waters (thank Obama!)?

What about children of Ambassadors and their staffs that are born overseas? Children of businessmen born overseas?

People that want to disenfranchise Cruz as a viable POTUS candidate have to toss a lot of other babies out with the bathwater.

ron vrooman Loc: Now OR, born NV

Well, there is the 1st law of the land. then there are those that deny the law and want the law of man in some cases. When it may benefit them most. obozo is a prime example.

non of your examples are valid. It is not where you were born DIP SHIT. It is to whom you were born. Read and comprehend.

I declare you PINO. probably again.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

I've read the law. The law of the land is on Cruz's side, just like it was on McCain's side. There is no serious person questioning that truth.

You declare me PINO? If I knew what you meant, it still wouldn't matter, because you aren't in a position to decide things about me.

But feel free to continue your temper tantrum.

ron vrooman Loc: Now OR, born NV

"The World is a Dangerous Place to Live; Not Because of the ​people who are EVIL, but Because of the People Who Don't Do Anything About It" Albert Einstein

He was talking about you. PINO

MrEd Loc: Georgia

I don't know what law you have been reading, but it was the wrong one. The law you need to be reading is the Constitution. Granted it does not tell you what a natural born citizen is, but this link does.
http://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/category/natural-born-citizen/

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Actually, it was the constitution. That is the law of the land.

The same constitution that said McCain was qualified says Cruz is qualified.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

I'll see your quote and raise you.

ron vrooman Loc: Now OR, born NV

Yes, she also has a good piece on muslims and the 1st.
However, she is a Member of the BAR and refuses the original 13th and all the bogus government since 1861. Lincoln was an attorney also. Not a hero.

ron vrooman Loc: Now OR, born NV

Loki Loc: Georgia

You are wrong. According to 8 USC, any child born to a US citizen parent anywhere in the world is a citizen from birth. This law was first passed in 1790, after the Constitution was ratified. It has been restated numerous times. As of 1994, it was made retroactive.
Contrary to popular opinion, and like so many legal documents, when the 1790 Act was "repealed and replaced" by the 1795 Act, most of the 1790 act was retained via notation. As a matter of fact, the 1952 Act found in 8USC is basically a revised version of the 1790 Act which stated that persons born on foreign soil to US parents are natural born. The 1952 Act amended that to one parent.
I have heard the fiction that Canadian law did not allow for dual citizenship in 1970 numerous times. I have yet to see a shred of proof that this is so.
Cruz's mother was a US citizen at the time of his birth. That makes him a US citizen from birth, i.e. natural born.
What Canadian law stated in 1970 was that anyone born in Canada had automatic Canadian citizenship, and what US law stated was that anyone born in Canada to a US citizen mother was a US citizen from birth. Technically, Ted Cruz is a legal natural born citizen of both the US and Canada.
Ted Cruz was Solicitor General of Texas. You must be a US citizen for that.
Ted Cruz was an Assistant US Attorney General. You must be a US citizen for that.
Ted Cruz has been admitted to the Bar of the US Supreme Court. His admission was in 2002, and you HAVE to be a US citizen for that.
The Senate is satisfied that he is a US citizen. Having derived that citizenship from his mother, he is, according to 8USC, a citizen from birth, and natural born.
Oh, yes, the Consular Report of Birth Abroad? Another fairy tale. It is recommended, but NOT required, that a parent register their child with this document.
Ted Cruz was a legal dual citizen of both the US and Canada. His renunciation of Canadian citizenship had no bearing or effect on his natural born US citizen status. This is Statutory US law and has been since 1790. If it were not, then James Buchanan could not have been president, Chester Arthur could not have been both President and Vice-President, George Romney, (Mitt's father ) could not have run for president in the sixties, John McCain could not have run in 2008, and Obama could not be president.
So, Mr. Vrooman, you claim that Canadian Law stated that in 1970, dual citizenship was not allowed, yet there it is. US law states that Ted Cruz is a US citizen from birth. Canadian law says that he is a Canadian citizen from birth. One is Jus Soli, one is Jus sanguinis. Two legal principles that have both been used as criteria to determing natural born status.
The Supreme Court opinions that state the Emmerich de Vattel definition of natural born (born in the US of 2 citizen parents ) do not say this is the only way the requirements can be fulfilled. It is certainly one way, but not the only one. Mr. Vattel published this opinion in 1758, and by the way, was never even a US citizen.There is also a world of difference between a Supreme Court opinion, and a Supreme Court decision.

Show me where Canadian law prohibited dual citizenship in 1970. I have heard a 1946 law quoted. I must have missed something because there is nothing in there about dual US/Canadian citizenship being prohibited.

I'll make it a little easier. The law may be found at SC 1946 c 15.
US Law as pertains to this may be found in 8 USC, mostly in the 1400 section.

ron vrooman Loc: Now OR, born NV

Loki,
I enlisted therefore the honorific does not fit. Just Ron.
I re posted it as the by line states.
I go with Pubius Huldah on this one. He is not a natural born regardless of Canadian birth because it follows the father just like obozo is not a lawful potus. Neither is Rubio.

One does not need to be an American to recognize the law. The Frenchy got it right

It is of no consequence where the mother was born as far as the Constitution is concerned, or what Canada says or anything else. It takes an amendment to make that change.
I think it should be the child of two natural born Americans is Constitutionally qualified.

the wife of cruz was on the committee and voted to have a North American Constitution.

Worried for our children Loc: Massachusetts

You are incorrect again Ron...though I think, or believe just as you do, that a person wanting to be president should be born in the U.S. of two U.S. born parents... the citizenship act of 1790 does not care what we think or believe.

The proviso in the Naturalization Act of 1790 underscores that while the concept of “natural born Citizen” has remained constant and plainly includes someone who is a citizen from birth by descent without the need to undergo naturalization proceedings, the details of which individuals born abroad to a citizen parent qualify as citizens from birth have changed. The pre-Revolution British statutes sometimes focused on paternity such that only children of citizen fathers were granted citizenship at birth. The Naturalization Act of 1790 expanded the class of citizens at birth to include children born abroad of citizen mothers as long as the father had at least been resident in the United States at some point. But Congress eliminated that differential treatment of citizen mothers and fathers before any of the potential candidates in the current presidential election were born. Thus, in the relevant time period, and subject to certain residency requirements, children born abroad of a citizen parent were citizens from the moment of birth, and thus are “natural born Citizens.”

Worried for our children Loc: Massachusetts

“Publius Huldah” (AKA Joanna Ruth Martin) is a Florida lawyer. She has a degree from the Florida State University College of Law and was admitted to the Florida Bar in 1973, #168769 . In 1974, she was an Army JAG lawyer in Florida, Captain Joanna R. Martin

In 1982-84, she was an assistant attorney general in Tallahassee, Florida. In 1986-87, she was an attorney with Harris & Martin in Stuart, FL. This information is available by running a Google search on her maiden name, Joanna R. Martin. She is 70 years old and apparently is (or was) married to Frank Scutari of Martin Co. FL.

Scutari was arrested in 1985 on federal accessory charges to an armed car robbery in San Francisco. According to the book, Terrorism in America, Frank Scutari pleaded a 3-year sentence. It lists his age as 40 in 1985. That makes him 70 now, which is the same age as one Frank Scutari of Moss, TN. Frank’s brother Richard pleaded a 60-year sentence. Joanna Martin also lived in Martin Co. and Port Salerno, FL in the mid 1980s. Scutari’s address in the articles below is 4818 Grouper Av, Port Salerno, FL. A search of that address found:

Frank Scutari: F J Scutari; Frank J Scutari
Listings (Early 70s): Moss, TN; Stuart, FL; Port Salerno, FL
Family: Amy Alicia Scutari; Bret Harding Scutari; Fred Joseph Scutari; Jennifer C Scutari; Kelly C Hannouche
Notice the middle initial J, same as Frank J. Scutari of Moss, TN. Also notice the Moss, TN and Stuart, FL cities (same as Joanna Martin), as well as the name Bret Scutari (Joanna’s son).

Here is Joanna Martin’s listing for Port Salerno, FL:

Joanna R Martin: Joanna Ruth Martin; Joanne Martin; Joanne R Martin; Joanna Scutari; Joanne Scutari
Listings (Early 70s): Moss, TN; Tallahassee, FL; Port Salerno, FL; North Palm Beach, FL; Stuart, FL; Jupiter, FL
Here is Joanna Scutari’s listing for Port Salerno, FL:

Joanna Scutari: Joanne Scutari; Joanna R Martin
Listings: Moss, TN
Conclusion: Frank Scutari mentioned in Terrorism in America is married to Joanna Scutari, AKA “Publius Huldah.”

(Palm Beach Post–Feb. 21, 1985) “Ex-Martin High Teacher’s Arrest Shocks Officials”

(Spokane Chronicle–Feb. 21, 1985) “Contractor Held in neo-Nazi Plot”

(The Silent Brotherhood: Inside America’s Racist Underground) Frank Scutari in “Epilogue: Blood Will Flow”

(Sun Sentinel–Mar. 6, 1985) “Neo-Nazi Case Suspect Freed”

(Associated Press Archive–Apr. 10, 1985) “Today’s Focus: Violent Neo-Nazi Group Apparently Smashed”

(Palm Beach Post–May 2, 1986) “Scutari Stymies Murder Investigation”

(Terrorism in America: Pipe Bombs and Pipe Dreams, Smith)

And one final note on Publius Halduh (Joanna Ruth Martin) the problem with her is she is pretending to be something she is not, a Constitutional Scholar. She is pretending her Law Degree is in Constitutional LAW and it is not. She continually makes false claims by using misdirected quotes from the Founders notes, letters and documents. I can provide a few examples if you'd like....

Loki Loc: Georgia