Ted Cruz: American or Canadian?

U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX).  (REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst)

U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX). (REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst)

Senator Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican whose recent travel has fueled speculation that he may run for president in 2016, has released his birth certificate, showing he was born in Canada to an American mother, the Dallas Morning News reported on Monday.

In a statement issued later, Cruz offered to renounce his Canadian citizenship in order to “be only an American.”

President Barack Obama, a Democrat and the first black U.S. president, faced intense scrutiny from “birthers” about his eligibility to be president. Born in 1961 to an American mother and Kenyan father, Obama released his birth certificate in 2011, which showed he was born in Hawaii.

The Dallas Morning News posted on its website a photo of Cruz’s birth certificate, which it said was released to the newspaper.

The U.S. Constitution states that only natural born U.S. citizens are eligible to hold the office of president. Some interpret that to mean born in the United States, while others say it includes someone who is born abroad to American parents.

Cruz, 42, was born in Calgary, Canada, while his Cuban-born father was working in the energy industry there, according to the birth certificate. His mother is American born.

Cruz released his birth certificate after several recent trips to Iowa, an early presidential caucus state. A conservative elected to the U.S. Senate last year, Cruz has strong support from Tea Party activists, who seek to reduce the size of the U.S. government.

The Dallas Morning News quoted Canadian legal experts as saying Cruz is technically a dual citizen of the United States and Canada and must renounce his Canadian citizenship to be president.

After initially saying through his spokeswoman that he did not believe he had dual citizenship, Cruz issued a statement saying that if reports that he was a Canadian citizen proved correct, “then sure, I will renounce any Canadian citizenship.”

“Because I was a U.S. citizen at birth, because I left Calgary when I was 4 and have lived my entire life since then in the U.S., and because I have never taken affirmative steps to claim Canadian citizenship, I assumed that was the end of the matter,” he said.

“Nothing against Canada, but I’m an American by birth and as a U.S. Senator, I believe I should be only an American.”
___

Copyright  © 2013 Thomson Reuters. All rights reserved.

Copyright  © 2013 Capitol Hill Blue

Enhanced by Zemanta

8 Responses to "Ted Cruz: American or Canadian?"

  1. beachshoe  August 20, 2013 at 9:15 am

    I lost what little interest I had in this article when I read that he “has strong support from Tea Party activists” but I would say that as a child of an American mother, he is an American citizen by birth right.

  2. SDRSr  August 20, 2013 at 11:03 am

    Well going to, what I believe will be the core issue, what is the definition of “Natural born Citizen”, called for by Article II, Section 1, paragraph 5, of the Constitution. Nor does this paragraph define what is meant. However, from the book “The Law of Nations” written by Emmerich de Vattel, in 1758, Senator Cruz is not a natural born citizen.

    The Law of Nations in Book 1, Chapter 19, § 212 (it is chauvinistic and falls in line with the then and current western inheritance traditions) clearly defines citizenship of a child born on foreign soil as inheriting from the Father.

    The Law of Nations is available in its entirety on-line.

    Oh, the Republican Primary may be worth watching, this could be fun. Now where did I put that case of Jiffy Pop…

    The Birthers may have found a second life…

    • woody188  August 22, 2013 at 8:08 am

      I’d have to agree with this. Would he also renounce his father’s surname?

      By strict interpretation of the law he is Cuban or Canadian.

  3. Keith  August 20, 2013 at 1:31 pm

    Funny, but nobody batted an eyelash when it was revealed during the 2008 election that Senator John McCain was born in Panama to American parents.

    Also, the first five or six US Presidents were all born in England.

    So, why is any of this an issue NOW. Perhaps what this country needs is someone who is NOT already beholden to American special interests…..particularly the “Terrorist Industrial Complex”.

    • David  August 20, 2013 at 3:30 pm

      “Funny, but nobody batted an eyelash when it was revealed during the 2008 election that Senator John McCain was born in Panama to American parents.”

      Not true. The Senate investigated and issued a non-binding resolution in McCain’s favor. That is more than “batting an eyelash”. There were also plenty of articles discussing it at the time, including in the New York Times.

      “Also, the first five or six US Presidents were all born in England.”

      If you actually read your Constitution, you will find it explicitly grants that either a “natural born citizen” OR a “citizen of the US at the time of the adoption of the Constitution” is eligible to be President. Provided they are at least 35 years old, and have been resident in the US for at least 14 years.

      BTW, that text does mean that it is possible to be a citizen of the USA without being a “natural born” citizen of the USA. A distinction which, of course, most people don’t care about today.

      “So, why is any of this an issue NOW.”

      Fact is, when it comes up, it is always an issue, whether a minor issue or a major issue depends on the facts of the particular matter.

    • SDRSr  August 20, 2013 at 4:40 pm

      I believe Senator McCain’s father was a US Citizen, thus making, John McCain a natural born citizen, under The Law of Nations.

      Second, I believe that when John McCain was born, he was born in the Canal Zone on a military installation. At that time the Canal Zone was considered US Soil for many intents and purposes.

      Do a Google search, using “John McCain Birth” and you’ll see many links to articles about that issue.

    • Danny Adams  August 20, 2013 at 5:13 pm

      “Also, the first five or six US Presidents were all born in England.”

      I’m assuming you mean English colonies here rather than England proper, since all of the first half-dozen presidents were born in North America. We may not make a distinction now but they certainly did in the 18th century.

      • Keith  August 22, 2013 at 9:44 am

        I’m well aware of what our Constitution says, and that these restrictions were all put in place so as to preclude a takeover of our fledgling nation by the equivalent of a “foreign king”.

        My real point was that what the country needs now is some real leadership from someone who is not already beholden to special interests. A so-called “foreigner” from Canada (or elsewhere) might fit that bill….particularly that our friends to the north have (up to now) been generating yearly financial surpluses and have maintained (despite the economic downturn) one of the strongest economies in the world.

        Of course, with all of the restrictions on citizenship and power splitting in our Constitution, such changes would be considered treasonous.

        But, then again, sometimes “too much democracy” can be a detriment….which may also be why our country is now in such a sorry economic state.

Comments are closed.