This post appeared on the RenounceUScitizenship blog.
Sen. Ted Cruz's citizenship saga could linger http://t.co/wB8Gem8RRq via @USATODAY – Is citizenship ownership or membership?
— U.S. Citizen Abroad (@USCitizenAbroad) August 20, 2013
Recent, shocking revelations regarding Texas Senator Ted Cruz! Ted Cruz is a Canadian citizen. Does this mean that he is not American or not completely American? Could he be “UnAmerican”? The above tweet references an article that reports the release of a story that …
… showed Cruz was born in 1970 in Calgary, Canada. His mother, Eleanor, was born in Delaware and was a U.S. citizen and his father, Rafael, was born in Cuba. Cruz had said in interviews prior to his Senate election that he is a U.S. citizen because his mother was born in the USA.
“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,” Cruz said in a statement released Monday.
“Now The Dallas Morning News says that I may technically have dual citizenship,” Cruz continued. “Assuming that is true, then sure, I will renounce any Canadian citizenship. Nothing against Canada, but I’m an American by birth and as a U.S. senator, I believe I should be only an American.”
Cruz will have to explain in writing why he doesn’t want to be Canadian, fill out a four-page form and get clearance from Canada’s spy agency, according to Reuters. The process could take up to eight months.
The four categories of U.S. Citizens
Category 1 – Those born in the United States
Those born in the United States acquire citizenship involuntarily. Nothing is required of them to become a U.S. citizen. The fact of birth inside the United States suffices. Therefore no specific “oath of allegiance” is required.
Category 2 – Those born to U.S. citizens abroad who claim U.S. citizenship
In certain circumstances those born outside the United States to one or more U.S. citizen parents may have a right to claim U.S. citizenship. This is the position that Mr. Cruz appears to be taking.
Category 3 – Immigrating to America – Naturalization – Your promise of obedience …
The U.S. was built on immigration. All immigrants arrived as citizens of other countries. Immigrants become citizens. The oath of citizenship includes:
“I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the armed forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.”
Those taking the oath of citizenship swear total devotion, obedience, and servitude to the United States. Yet, the U.S. has many citizens who continue to be citizens of other countries – making them dual citizens. Does dual citizenship imply dual loyalty? Does dual citizenship imply divided loyalty? Should a U.S. Navy pilot with dual Canadian/U.S. citizenship be forced to renounce his Canadian citizenship?
Interestingly only those citizens who did NOT acquire U.S. citizenship by being born in the United States are required to promise such devotion, obedience and servitude.
The idea is that “you’re with us or you’re against us”. Purity is demanded in U.S. politics. Can or should a dual citizen be entitled to participate in U.S. politics? Is there a reason for Ted Cruz to renounce Canadian citizenship?
Category 4 – “Natural born citizen” – A requirement to be president
When it comes to being President of the United States, not all citizens are equal. The constitution requires that one be a “natural born” citizen. This was an issue faced by George Romney (Mitt Romney’s father) when he ran for president in 1968.
But, let’s not overshoot the mark. The first step is to decide whether Senator Ted Cruz is a U.S. citizen at all.
Is Ted Cruz a U.S. citizen at all?
The likely perspectives of Senators Levin, Schumer, Reed and others
Mr. Cruz was born in Calgary, Canada in 1970. It is likely that from the perspectives of Senators Levin, Schumer, Reed and others, that this is odd and suspicious. Was his Canadian birth planned by his parents? Why would they allow young Ted to be born outside the United States? After all, the state of Montana is not far from Calgary. There were “fifty perfectly good states” for a child to be born in. Why would his parents allow Mr. Cruz to be born in Canada? Were his parents ever disloyal to the United States? What were they doing in Canada anyway? Certainly there were perfectly good jobs available to them in the United States. Were they trying to evade U.S. taxes? Did they file their FBARs? They may have been running a business. What a from 5471? Should they be punished for leaving the United States?
The likely perspective of somebody grounded in reality
The Cruz family went where they could make a living. They went where they could feed themselves. Ted Cruz was born in Canada because – are you ready for this – it’s where the family was living.
Regardless of the reason …
Ted Cruz was born outside the United States on “foreign” soil. He was clearly a “natural born” Canadian. (How can a “natural born” Canadian be a “natural born” American?) There is a presumption that those born outside the U.S. are NOT U.S. citizens. Mr. Cruz claims his U.S. citizenship on the basis that his mother was a U.S. citizen. More is required. When one is born outside the U.S., a claim to U.S. citizenship is based on a showing of specific facts.
In 1970, these facts included the U.S. citizenship status of one or both of the parents and the length of time that the the “U.S. citizen parent resided in the U.S.
In 1970, the law was that a person born outside the United States had a claim to U.S. citizenship if one parent was a U.S. citizen and that parent had at least ten years of physical presence in the U.S. and five years after the age of fourteen.
If you are born outside the United States – The citizenship of your parents matters!
Introducing Mr. Cruz’s Mother: Mr. Cruz bases his citizenship on the claim that his mother was born in the United States (in that notorious tax haven of Delaware).
Introducing Mr. Cruz’s Father: He was apparently a citizen of Cuba (a Communist enemy of the United States).
A portrait of the Senator as a young man
Mr. Cruz and Mr. FBAR were both born in 1970. Mr. Cruz was born “offshore”, in a foreign country – Calgary, Canada. Mr. FBAR was born in the Homeland. Mr. FBAR was designed to “alert the Homeland” to “offshore” Americans. Did Mr. FBAR play a role in the detection of the Cruz family? Apparently Mr. Cruz lived in Calgary until he was 4. What was he doing during those 4 years? Did the family have a bank account with a Canadian bank? Did his parents have a bank account for Mr. Cruz? Should an FBAR have been filed on his behalf or on behalf of his mother? Did the family file their U.S. tax and information returns?
But, more on the mother – was she capable of transmitting citizenship to young Ted?
Senator Cruz claims his mother is a U.S. citizen because she was born in the United States.
But even proof of this fact is NOT sufficient to prove Mr. Cruz’s U.S. citizenship!
Did his mother have sufficient residential ties to the U.S. to be able to transmit U.S. citizenship to young Ted? Did she have a physical presence in the U.S. of at least ten years? Did she have a physical presence in the U.S. for at least five years after the age of fourteen? These questions are of vital importance!
What Senator Cruz needs to do …
In addition to releasing his own birth certificate, Senator Cruz needs to provide:
1. His mother’s birth certificate or other proof that the person who he claims to be his mother was born in the U.S.;
2. Proof that that the person who he claims to be his mother is really his mother; and
3. Proof that at the time young Ted was born, that his mother had a physical presence in the U.S. of at least ten years and five years after the age of fourteen.
Nothing less will suffice!
The Senator must understand that he was born “offshore” on “foreign” soil. This means that there is a presumption against his being a U.S. citizen. He owes it to the United States of America to rebut this presumption and to prove his U.S. citizenship. His presumed patriotism demands nothing less!
Although his U.S. citizenship is not clear, Senator Cruz is clearly a Canadian citizen Perhaps he should NOT renounce his Canadian citizenship until he has proven – on a preponderance of the evidence – that he truly is a U.S. citizen.
Senator Cruz’s position is …
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,” Cruz said in a statement released Monday.
That is a completely “UnAmerican” position. He could he possibly think such a thing? This contradicts the position of the U.S. government. Let me clarify by asking a question.
Q. What if Mr. Cruz had been born in the United States and left at the age of four for Canada and never “claimed” his U.S. citizenship? Would the U.S. take the position that he was NOT a U.S. citizen?
A. The U.S. would take the position that he was a U.S. citizen whether he “claimed his citizenship” or not. It would then assert direct rights of ownership and abuse over him.
Ted Cruz should consider himself very lucky, because the citizenship he claims he didn’t realize he had doesn’t carry any punishment for his failure to recognize it. Moreover renouncing, if he really intends to follow through on that promise, will be relatively simple, cheap, and painless other than the cost to his US political career, if any. Not so if he had lived his life in Canada with his current apparent dual status. US citizens abroad now understand that discovering ties to the US means discovering a world of obligations and consequences flowing from citizenship that you were expected to know and obey. Ignorance of the law being no excuse, the punishments range from the merely ridiculous–many times any tax that would have ever been due–to the infuriating: life savings wiped out and many future tax savings sponsored by your home government, such as in education or health savings plans, treated as offshore trusts and therefore confiscated by the US. Moreover there is no ready escape hatch for the newly discovered and unwanted US citizenship: five years of full tax reporting compliance must be documented, appointments must be made with officials, fees must be remitted, interviews must be conducted, and in some cases exit taxes must be paid. If some in Congress get their way, renunciation could even mean life-time banishment from the US someday soon.
But more on this issue in: “The Cruz Chronicles 2”
For the moment the message to Senator Cruz should be:
You have some “paperwork” to do. Perhaps some forms to complete.
And the message to the rest of the world is:
It’s difficult to have the course of your life determined by your place of birth. Ask those five to seven million U.S. citizens abroad! Geography is their wound!
Section 1 of Article Two of the United States Constitution sets forth the eligibility requirements for serving as president of the United States: “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.”
The Twelfth Amendment states, “No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.”
Article One of the United States Constitution, representatives and senators are only required to be U.S. citizens.
Considering that the United States confers US citizenship upon non-CONUS residing births through birthright citizenship; most children born to US born mothers (who met the onerous requirements necessary to convey birthright citizenship; (one parent is a U.S. citizen and the other parent is not (as per Senator Cruz’s case), the child is a citizen if – the U.S. citizen parent has been “physically present” in the U.S. before the child’s birth for a total period of at least five years, and at least two of those five years were after the U.S. citizen parent’s fourteenth birthday)) would be considered eligible to run for President if they had resided for 15 years in the United States prior to the age of 35. (They need time to indoctrinate those foreigner Americans who were given US citizenship by their mother as to the exclusivity of being American).
If he wants to be a full-fledged American along with the brainwashing that goes along with it…fine. Good for him. As far as Canadians are concerned, we don’t need someone like him as a Canadian. My advice to him is: Renounce your Canadian citizenship, become a full-fledged American. Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
Maybe Alberta Medicare should bill him for the amount of money Canadian taxpayers had to pay for his birth? Or is he going to steal that medicare amount and run off to the Excited States of Amnesia?
Incidentally, 8 USC § 1482 (INA § 350) used to say (I think this may have been discussed somewhere in the big renunciation thread):
66 Stat. It was repealed in October 1978. Much too early for Cruz to benefit from it, though I wonder if it can be helpful to some of the Canadian border babies here who are at least in their late 50s and never did anything to assert a claim to US citizenship in the past 35 years. 7 FAM 1230, Appendix C has the following tantalising little bit:
Since Ted Cruz’s mother was born in the US and graduated from a US university more than 10 years before he was born, it’s safe to assume that she had well more than 10 years, 5 years after the age of 14, of physical presence in the US.
As a sidenote, Barack Obama’s mother was 18 years old when he was born. She had 10 years of physical presence in the US, but slightly less than 5 years after the age of 14. That’s why, if he had been born outside the US, he would not be a US citizen at birth.
Another sidenote, since John McCain’s parents were both US citizens, the requirement was only that one of them had ever resided in the US, with no minimum number of years. They both satisfied this requirement. Being born in a US military base is irrelevant.
Since 1986, the requirements for transmitting citizenship are lower: 5 years of US physical presence, 2 years after the age of 14.
The requirements of parents’ physical presence for transmitting citizenship seem to be unknown by the general public and not explained in the media, often leading to incorrect conclusions when comparing the three cases.
Every opportunity to comment on this should draw comparisons between the Canadian and US situation, as Allison Christians does here:
http://taxpol.blogspot.ca/2013/08/here-is-only-reason-why-ted-cruzs.html
“…Ted Cruz should consider himself very lucky, because the citizenship he claims he didn’t realize he had doesn’t carry any punishment for his failure to recognize it. Moreover renouncing, if he really intends to follow through on that promise, will be relatively simple, cheap, and painless other than the cost to his US political career, if any.
Not so if he had lived his life in Canada with his current apparent dual status. US citizens abroad now understand that discovering ties to the US means discovering a world of obligations and consequences flowing from citizenship that you were expected to know and obey. Ignorance of the law being no excuse, the punishments range from the merely ridiculous–many times any tax that would have ever been due–to the infuriating: life savings wiped out and many future tax savings sponsored by your home government, such as in education or health savings plans, treated as offshore trusts and therefore confiscated by the US. Moreover there is no ready escape hatch for the newly discovered and unwanted US citizenship: five years of full tax reporting compliance must be documented, appointments must be made with officials, fees must be remitted, interviews must be conducted, and in some cases exit taxes must be paid. If some in Congress get their way, renunciation could even mean life-time banishment from the US someday soon.
In the grand scheme of things Ted Cruz’s citizenship is a non-story. But for what it illustrates about citizenship-based taxation, it could be the story of the century.”
Another fantastic blog entry by Victoria, on the topic of Ted Cruz, and of citizenship transmission:
http://thefranco-americanflophouse.blogspot.ca/2013/08/ted-cruz-birthright-citizenship-is-not.html
So Mr Cruz has awoken to the fact that he’s an ‘accidental Canadian’. It’s fortunate for him that Canada won’t subject him to the same nightmare that ‘accidental Americans’ the world over are waking up to.
Mr Cruz’s ignorance and presumptuousness is mind-boggling but unfortunately typical of how many Americans think. First of all he’s an American “at birth” and a Canadian “by birth”. Secondly he assumes that somehow his American citizenship negated his Canadian. To renounce his Canadian he can make an online payment of $100 to the Canadian government and maybe have to see a Canadian citizenship judge at his local Canadian consulate. By contrast, in order to renounce US citizenship (even if you were born outside the US) Americans throughout the world must file at least 5 years worth of US tax returns, pay all back taxes and penalties owed, make at least one visit to a US consulate where they pay a fee of $450, and in many cases pay a hefty exit tax. The US should call themselves “land of the fee” for it certainly isn’t free with the walls it’s erected around itself.
I find this Cruz development infuriating. I guess it’s how easy he can rid himself of Canadian citizenship while US citizenship is not for the many of us who are in virtually the same position he’s in. His flippant comment that he has nothing against Canada and his unnecessary treatment of Canadian citizenship as a nuisance is in stark contrast to what US citizens abroad have to endure when it comes to US citizenship.
USCitizenAbroad,
Thanks so much for this well-presented analysis of “what is US citizenship,” in this case for US Presidential hopeful, Ted Cruz. I have just forwarded the link to the Wall Street Journal reporters who have recently put out some of the more complete articles on this and who continue to follow the story.
Renouncing Canadian citizenship won’t make Cruz any more American, but I suppose many would view him as having divided loyalties if he kept it.
If Cruz is a Rand Paul follower, I support him.
Several months ago I did some research into which US lawmakers were born on foreign soil.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign-born_United_States_politicians
It was my intention to write to each of them and ask how they would feel if the country they were from harassed them for taxes. I never got around to it but I did come across Geoff Davis, a congressman for Kentucky who was born in Canada. He’s now apparently resigned, but while in office I noted that he didn’t mention a thing about being born and living in Canada in his bio, which according to Wikipedia he did until he graduated from high school. Is the political culture in the US so xenophobic that any mention of a foreign birth place is political suicide, and in Cruz’s case warrants an immediate promise to distance himself from it?
@bubblebustin: Is the political culture in the US so xenophobic that any mention of a foreign birth place is political suicide, and in Cruz’s case warrants an immediate promise to distance himself from it?
I don’t think the US public hates dual citizenship or a foreign birthplace specifically; what they hate is the idea that a prominent American would want to retain any kind of connection to a foreign country. That would require them to question the article of faith that America Is Number One. They’re happy to elect immigrant politicians, as long as those immigrants come to the US, never leave, and adopt the same old jingoistic nationalism as everyone else: that’s an affirmation of their country, that someone would reject their birth country and uproot themselves in order to move to the US.
The public are much less happy with native-born Americans who have lived abroad (like John Kerry) or who voluntarily chose a foreign citizenship (like Michelle Bachmann). That’s why Cruz has to play up the whole “I had absolutely no idea I might be a Canadian” angle even if it makes him look utterly clueless and unsuited to be president; the alternative would be for him to admit he chose to keep Canadian citizenship just in case, which would basically be sacrilege against the U.S. civic religion and lead to his excommunication.
@Eric
So he’s either stupid or a liar. I’m not feeling generous enough to use more euphemistic words like clueless or disingenuous.
Allison Christians’ post got featured by Paul Caron over at TaxProf Blog:
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2013/08/christians-tax-consequences-.html
He points to another similar piece over at Roth CPA:
http://rothcpa.com/2013/08/the-saga-of-canada-cruz/
When US politicians can’t even figure out that they have another citizenship, how can they blame us for not knowing about CBT and all the other nonsense that goes with it?
We can call it the ‘Cruz defense’! We didn’t know we had US citizenship! This is in contrast to undocumented expatriates who thought they’d relinquished US citizenship, of course.
For another take- this time from Amsterdam
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2013/Pres/Maps/Aug20.html#item-1
In addition to the medicare amount used on his birth; is he going to also pay back to the Alberta government all amounts paid to his mother with regards to the Canada Family Allowance checks sent to his mother on his behalf? Or is that going to also be conveniently forgotten?
I’d be happy just to see her US tax returns and FBARs. Mind you $10K is probably more like 70 today, but she could have been a saver especially if they were planning to relocate.
If he’s going to turn around and spit on the doorstep of Canada as he’s waltzing out the door. I want to see all Family Allowance amounts for the 4 years he spent in this nation of ours as well as the amounts paid by Medicare on behalf of his sorry ass returned prior to his leaving.
And who would care about this ridiculous politician? A lying opportunistic manipulator.
This is again an issue where US law seems to do things in a more complex way than Canadian law. In US law, whether the US citizen parent can pass on citizenship to their children born abroad depends, in part, on how long the US citizen parent lived in the US. That can be a very difficult thing to prove one way or the other years later as some of the links regarding Cruz note. The question may well come up as to whether Mom can show her US phone bills or actually Mum was getting her phone bills in Canada.
In the analogous situation in Canada–where someone is born outside Canada to Canadian parents–the rule is simpler. It depends not on the number of years lived in Canada but on the number of generations born abroad–a much easier thing to prove one way or the other. The first generation born abroad to Canadian parents get Canadian citizenship. The second generation born abroad do not get Canadian citizenship.
There are actually two different ways someone like Cruz can establish their citizenship, and it might be interesting to know which path he took. One is to apply, through USCIS, for a Certificate of Citizenship. Unlike its Canadian counterpart document, the US Certificate of Citizenship is given ONLY to people in Cruz’ situation. He can then use this Certificate of Citizenship to apply for a US passport. The other approach is to apply directly for a US passport.
So note that there are actually two different government departments Cruz (or his mother) might have gone to to establish US citizenship–State (if he went directly for a passport) or Homeland Security (formerly Justice) (if he went for the Certificate of Citizenship first). My understanding is that although the two departments are supposedly applying the same laws, they don’t always come up with the same decision. For example, there are people who were denied a Certificate of Citizenship (for lack of sufficient proof) but still get a US passport. Does such a person have a solid claim to US citizenship?
There is also the tricky question of whether Cruz would–if trying to run for president–would be considered not just a citizen, but a natural born citizen. The phrase “natural born citizen” actually isn’t defined in US law. It is defined in Canadian law (even though it affords no additional rights in Canada) and someone in an analogous situation to Cruz is a natural born citizen under Canadian law. But the rules are simpler in Canada. Should someone for whom the rules are quite tricky really be considered a “natural born” US citizen?
One thing that is for sure is that simply producing a birth certificate showing Canadian birth to a US-born mother won’t be sufficient.
I hate to point this out….but the Certificate says CALGARY…meanwhile the article says “EDMONTON”
One should be careful saying others have it wrong and then misstep oneself…
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2013/Pres/Maps/Aug20.html#item-1
I don’t think any of us are highlighting his political policies. That is the US homelanders’ problem to sort out.
We do need to, however, compare his Canadian citizenship situation, without the draconian results to renounce, to “Accidental Americans” born in other countries of this wide world.
@the Animal
I don’t know what the circumstances are that would require a renunciant of Canadian citizenship to reimburse for services received in Canada as a legal resident.