Garth Wright: Born in Britain doesn’t make you a Briton

Re: “Constitution is clear, Cruz ineligible” (Letters, Jan. 28): While I appreciate the writer’s concerns about the interpretation of Constitutional phrase “natural born” citizen, I must take issue with his interpretation. He states his children, born in England, could never assume the presidency of the United States. Did he not get a certificate of citizenship from the U.S. Embassy? Were his children not entered on their mother’s passport?

Mine had all of these, courtesy of the United States Air Force. Since Britain confers citizenship only by the citizenship of registered British parents, a child born of American parents living there would be stateless without recognition by American authorities. Additionally, using the writer’s logic, not a single member of the founding fathers would have been eligible to be the President since at the time of their births they were all British; George Washington included. American parents produce American children, no matter where they are born. Blood, it would seem, is thicker than geography.

This story was originally published January 29, 2016 at 11:09 AM with the headline "Garth Wright: Born in Britain doesn’t make you a Briton."