Thanks...based on an post earlier this morning, I’m curious as to whether or not naturalization took place and would that be documented on his CRBA. As others have stated, there are only two types of citizens, natural, or naturalized..
If he is withholding some of the documentation..the question is why?
I have the feeling that we are being played..again.
The technical legal label that attaches to that is "naturalization" because the citizenship depends on the statute. Naturalized citizens can be divided into various groupings too, but all of them get citizenship by statute. Some get it automatically at birth, some have to go through a proceeding.
The CRBA documents that the conditions associated with a birth abroad satisfy the conditions for attaching citizenship. That's all it says. It doesn't say "Certificate of Naturalization," even though SCOTUS cases make it clear that any citizenship associated with birth abroad requires a statute to enable it. Congress can enable whatever strict or loose conditions it wants to, with a statute. It has plenary power of naturalization.
-- If he is withholding some of the documentation..the question is why? --
He knows the public is stupid. Heck, he got a reaction by releasing his mother's BC, which is totally irrelevant! He's just waiting for a time when he thinks releasing the FS-240 will put out the fire. He knows no court will take the case on the merits, so his goal is to convince the public that all citizens at birth are natural born citizens. That a trivially easy "fact" to put over on the public - a good part of (maybe most of) which already believes it. But there will be a few who raise eyebrows at a Canadian Birth Certificate, and it takes time for that fact to percolate and register. Once enough people are at the "But he's Canadian!" stage, he'll show the CRBA, which declares him to be a US Citizen from birth.