U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) will renounce his Canadian citizenship, a sign that he is seriously considering seeking the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.
“Serving as a U.S. senator, I think it’s appropriate I be only an American,” Cruz told CNN’s Candy Crowley.
Cruz is a dual citizen of the United States and Canada – having been born in Alberta, Canada to an American mother. Prior to his announcement, Cruz’s campaign had claimed that dual citizenship did not apply in his case.
“He never had Canadian citizenship, so there is nothing to renounce,” a Cruz spokesman said earlier this week.
Apparently they took a closer look at the situation …
Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution maintains that “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
Scholars have generally agreed that any child born to an American citizen anywhere in the world retains U.S. citizenship. However Canadian legal experts are adamant that any child born in Canada is also a Canadian citizen – unless the child was born to a visiting diplomat.
Cruz’s decision makes sense … and we agree with him that the whole citizenship debate is silly. However establishment Republicans are jumping at the opportunity to turn the issue into
“During a time when the (Republican Party) is desperately trying to establish good faith relationships with minority voters – and spending millions to do it – Ted Cruz is renouncing his dual citizenship giving the impression that holding dual citizenship is beneath him,” the establishment Republican blog GOPWrite.com observed. “What kind of message does this send to the millions of Americans who hold dual citizenship?”
Um … it sends a Lee Greenwood message, doesn’t it?
The blog added that sources close to former S.C. Speaker (and U.S. Ambassador to Canada) David Wilkins (RINO-Greenville) were ripping Cruz as well – referring to his renunciation as “uncivilized” and “sloppy.”
Sheesh …
According to recent polling, Cruz is supported by 12 percent of Republican voters in a hypothetical GOP primary election. U.S. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) led the way with the support of 16 percent of GOP primary voters.
33 comments
The hard right doesn’t even like Rand anymore because he opened the door to not shutting the government down for “defunding” Obamacare, he has been willing to listen to immigration reformers, and he’s not sufficiently anti-McConnell. Rubio is already dead to them, so that means it’s only Cruz—a half-Canadian who couldn’t get elected dog catcher outside of the deep red South. Extremely, extremely sad.
Does he find dog meat tasty? If so, maybe he is presidential material…
Senor Cruz no es Cubano? No es Communista?
Canadians are breathing a collective sigh of relief at this announcement.
Has Cruz produced a long-form birth certificate to prove he’s not a deep cover operative of Fidel Castro?
Born in Alberta ? Not in America ? Hell, might as well have been Kenya. Cruz ??
Time to drone strike those assholes in Canada.
If Canada had known that douchenozzle was a citizen, they probably would have renounced him first.
Does he consider the Muslim call to prayer the most beautiful sound in the world? If so, maybe he is presidential material…
TGB suspects he prefers the call of northern loons.
Ted Cruz. Makes Tom look like the voice of reason.
Cruz is a stealth Canadian effort to claim the White House in order to get back all of their hockey players and beer we have taken from them over the years…
What are the Birthers doing now.
Come on birthers lets see the outrage that this foreign born son of an American mother wants to run for President….call Orly..call The Donald…lets get the private investigators on this pronto…..get your signs painted and you hate mongering call outs ready. Don’t sit on your behind and wait until the last minute…..CHOP CHOP.
Birthers are dumb to deny the clear evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii. But Obama was a fundamentally different scenario than Cruz because of the peculiarities of our immigration laws in place at the time of his birth and his mother’s age/marital status. If Obama had been born outside the US, he probably would not be eligible. With Cruz, there is no such issue to work out.
And……he is Black and a Democrat……more importantly you’re right,Birthers are dumb.
And the press only takes birtherism seriously now because Cruz is a conservative Republican. Isn’t the argument from hypocrisy fun! You don’t even have pretend to have the ability to think logically.
bull shit. his mother was a US citizen. as such he is undeniably a US citizen. He could have claimed dual nationality — but didn’t unlijke Sen Ted Crud
Brilliant legal analysis, Perry Mason. The problem is (or would be, since he was born in the US), is that the relevant statute (8 usc 1401) used to provide that if only 1 parent was a US citizen, they had to have lived in the US for at least 5 years after age 14. Obama’s mother was 18, so he could not qualify as natural born through her on a technicality. Fortunately for Obama, he is natural born by virtue of being born here.
That does not make sense, the question is the Constitutional definition of “natural born citizen”, no the statutory definition. 8 USC 1401 did not exist in 1787 and has nothing to do with who can constitutionally be President.
Your argument makes no sense. The Constitution uses many terms without defining them. For instance, the Constitution gives authority to deal with “Indian Tribes,” but includes no procedure for determining what constitutes a recognized tribe. Congress does that.
This should be even more obvious in the area of citizenship. The Constitution repeatedly gives eligibility requirements about being a “Citizen” of the United States or of a State, but you will note that there is nothing in there setting forth how you become a citizen of the US or of a particular state (also worth noting the United States. That is something Congress (or the state, as it may be) has always been understood to have the power to legislate. Congress absolutely has the right to set forth how one becomes a naturalized citizen. There were no citizenship tests in 1787 either, but I doubt you are challenging the constitutionality of that requirement for naturalization.
The Manitoban Candidate!
Beware, he will have us all wearing mandatory red-and-black flannel and those goofy “mad-bomber” hats. Even Hawaiians.
He’ll order us to hail the queen.
Or maybe it’s The Matanzas Candidate. Wasn’t his father Cuban?
We’ll all have to wear straw hats or fatigue caps and carry machetes.
Sounds kinda racist to me…
Most everything does . . . to some.
…and the debate will be “Which is best : the first beer of the day…or the last beer of the day, eh?”
Ted Cruz for EL PRESIDENTE, eh??
it is the right move. i hope he runs for the 2016 Presidency. he will be a great US president.
Now if Obama will just renounce all of his. Kenya, Malaysia, any others? Caliphate maybe.
This just makes him look stupider.
same issue here in SC where Mandy Wilkes held dual Israeli-US citizenship yet wanted to run for the new 7th district seat. Bottom line: If you want to be a US leader, then renounce your other dual citizenship AT THE OUTSET, before you run.
Since his father was a Cuban does that make him a Cuban too?
I hope he runs. I look forward to calling him a half Hispanic Canuck throughout the election.