Jeese, that was 2011 and what Cruz was covered under was the law at his time of birth.
I am not going to waste any more time on this until the SC makes the decision. Then maybe you will be satisfied one way or another. There are constitutional lawyers on both sides of this subject no matter how many references you provide. Even Trump said he had consulted all his lawyers in Sept. last year and they all said Cruz was legal!!!!!
So you and I and everybody else is just going to have to wait.
Got a link to that or am I just supposed to "take your word on it"?
The year the video was made doesn't change what he's talking about.
...and what Cruz was covered under was the law at his time of birth.
Well that brings us right back to my original question which you've yet to answer...
Why would an immigration (positive) law be needed by someone who was supposed to already be a citizen through natural law?