Posted on 08/27/2013 2:27:12 PM PDT by Cold Case Posse Supporter
Jeff, you’re purposely ignoring the fact that NATIVE-born citizen is further broken down by USCIS as EITHER native-born citizen OR natural-born citizen, WHICHEVER status existed prior to the loss of citizenship.
Read it again:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3059469/posts?q=1&;page=179#174
I realize you’re frustrated because the facts directly contradict your wishful thinking, but you’re making yourself look really foolish by pretending that what’s clearly written in black and white AND published by the USCIS as late as 2013, isn’t there.
Give up. You’re wrong.
Excellent points, all.
I fully agree.
Dane = Bayard
A person whose international status is dependent upon law or treaty clearly and reliably distinguishes all persons who may be “citizens of the United States” from “natural born citizens” whose status does not depend on law or treaty.
LOL! 'Puffery'. There's a good old fashioned word I haven't heard in a while.
I actually understand a bit of reticence on the topic. Unlike a number of people, you seem to be a rational person who is swayed by evidence. You just need to have enough evidence.
I myself started out not knowing much about the topic. Now I know a LOT about it. And over the course of gathering more information over the past couple of years, regarding "natural born citizen" in general and Ted Cruz and people in his situation in particular, I have gone from "mmm.... probably eligible, but possibly not," to "most likely eligible," to "almost certainly eligible," to "You know what? Ted Cruz is eligible."
The concern is “natural born citizen” more-so than dual nationality.
“Natural born citizen” is a requisite quality for an Office.
At #145, I posted the Foreign Affairs Manual text about U.S. citizens with dual nationality and the problems they might encounter internationally. Those problems can occur even with natural-born citizens.
I am a natural-born citizen, born on U.S. soil (in Ohio) to two U.S. citizen parents (both also natural-born). My allegiance is solely to the U.S. My paternal great-grandfather emigrated from Germany to the U.S. and became a naturalized citizen.
Being a sovereign nation, Germany can legally declare me a citizen of Germany. Let’s suppose they did and that I went to work in Germany for some number of months for my U.S. employer. I would be a natural-born U.S. citizen working in Germany and a German citizen who is subject to the jurisdiction of German law. Treaty or not, as a citizen of Germany, temporarily residing in Germany, I would have the same rights and responsibilities of other German citizens, unless I legally renounced that German citizenship before stepping foot in Germany.
I guess I am missing your point(s). Problems with dual nationality can occur with natural-born U.S. citizens also. So what is the distinction you’re drawing with respect to “international status?”
To become a German citizen you would have to fulfill the requirements of German naturalization law.
US and German naturalization laws are mutually recognized by treaty.
If Germany abrogated treaty and decided that all persons within their borders were immediately declared to be German citizens - it would be an international incident possibly leading to war.
German citizenship has historically been passed from citizen to citizen - jus sanguinus. Your great-grandfather became a US citizen. His children are not German - they are US.
For you to loose your US NBC status would require an explicit act of renunciation.
Here's how I KNOW the Grndma is telling the TRUTH about being there when Bammy was born......THEY HAVE SEALED HER OFF FROM THE WORLD!!! You can't get NEAR HER and she said she's NOT ALLOWED TO TALK!!!
You are either a DU or VERY CLOSED MINDED ABOUT THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN IN FRON OF YOUR FACE.
Dual nationality is not on point vis-a-vis distinguishing between "natural born citizen" and "citizen of the United States"
I have seen no actual evidence Mama was in Africa.
Ya know, I wish you guys could just argue your case, instead of TYPING IN ALL CAPS, and accusing others of deceit.
It is at least theoretically possible I know as much about the case as you and honestly reached a different conclusion.
What you are doing is the right-wing equivalent of accusing anyone who doesn’t believe in “global warming” of being a dishonest hired shill of “industry.”
Or of me accusing you of being a birther because you are racist. But I am respecting your right to reach a different conclusion, and I do you the respect of assuming it was reached for honorable reasons.
Different countries have varying requirements for renouncing citizenship. A major cause of the War of 1812 was British refusal to recognize the right of British citizens to renounce their citizenship and become American citizens (only). Thus they impressed American citizens into the Royal Navy on the grounds they still owed allegiance to the King.
you ARE a DU’er....thanks for exposing yourself.
Just for the record, how do you deduce my being a DUer from what I posted?
Cause you aren’t Freeper QUALITY....DUH
Also just for the record, I’ve been on FR since 2006. The count of posts and articles seems to have disappeared, but I’m pretty sure I’ve posted over 20,000 times.
And I doubt I’ve been to the DU website 10x during that period.
Great....I’ve been here 9 years LONGER and have seen many people like you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.