Sen. Ted Cruz Makes It Official

[n david]

After further review...

Here's the text of the updated amendment Cruz submitted in January:

114TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION S. 247
To amend section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to deem
specified activities in support of terrorism as renunciation of United
States nationality, and for other purposes.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
JANUARY 22, 2015
Mr. CRUZ (for himself and Mr. GRASSLEY) introduced the following bill; which
was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
A BILL
To amend section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality
Act to deem specified activities in support of terrorism
as renunciation of United States nationality, and for
other purposes.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Expatriate Terrorist Act’’.

1 SEC. 2. LOSS OF NATIONALITY DUE TO SUPPORT OF TERRORISM.
3 Section 349(a) of the Immigration and Nationality
4 Act (8 U.S.C. 1481(a)) is amended to read as follows:
5 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—A person who is a national of
6 the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall
7 lose his or her nationality by voluntarily performing any
8 of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing
9 United States nationality:
10 ‘‘(1) Obtaining naturalization in a foreign state
11 upon his or her own application or upon an applica12
tion filed by a duly authorized agent, after having
13 attained 18 years of age.
14 ‘‘(2) Taking an oath or making an affirmation
15 or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign
16 state, a political subdivision thereof, or a foreign ter17
rorist organization designated under section 219,
18 after having attained 18 years of age.
19 ‘‘(3) Entering, or serving in, the armed forces
20 of a foreign state or a foreign terrorist organization
21 designated under section 219 if—
22 ‘‘(A) such armed forces are engaged in
23 hostilities against the United States; or
24 ‘‘(B) such persons serve as a commissioned
25 or noncommissioned officer.

1 ‘‘(4) Becoming a member of, or providing training or material assistance to, any foreign terrorist
3 organization designated under section 219.
4 ‘‘(5) Accepting, serving in, or performing the
5 duties of any office, post, or employment under the
6 government of a foreign state, a political subdivision
7 thereof, or a foreign terrorist organization des8
ignated under section 219 if—
9 ‘‘(A) the person knowingly has or acquires
10 the nationality of such foreign state; or
11 ‘‘(B) an oath, affirmation, or declaration
12 of allegiance to the foreign state, political sub13
division, or designated foreign terrorist organi14
zation is required for such office, post, or em15
ployment.
16 ‘‘(6) Making a formal renunciation of United
17 States nationality before a diplomatic or consular of18
ficer of the United States in a foreign state, in such
19 form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State.
20 ‘‘(7) Making in the United States a formal
21 written renunciation of nationality in such form as
22 may be prescribed by, and before such officer as
23 may be designated by, the Attorney General, when24
ever the United States shall be in a state of war and
25 the Attorney General shall approve such renunci-ation as not contrary to the interests of national defense.
3 ‘‘(8)(A) Committing any act of treason against,
4 or attempting by force to overthrow, or bearing arms
5 against, the United States;
6 ‘‘(B) violating or conspiring to violate any of
7 the provisions of section 2383 of title 18, United
8 States Code;
9 ‘‘(C) willfully performing any act in violation of
10 section 2385 of title 18, United States Code; or
11 ‘‘(D) violating section 2384 of such title by en12
gaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to
13 destroy by force the Government of the United
14 States, or to levy war against them,
15 if and when such person is convicted thereof by a
16 court martial or by a court of competent jurisdic17
tion.’’.

18 SEC. 3. REVOCATION OR DENIAL OF PASSPORTS AND PASSPORT CARDS TO INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE MEMBERS OF FOREIGN TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS.
22 The Act entitled ‘‘An Act to regulate the issue and
23 validity of passports, and for other purposes’’, approved
24 July 3, 1926 (22 U.S.C. 211a et seq.), which is commonly

1 known as the ‘‘Passport Act of 1926’’, is amended by add
2 ing at the end the following:
3 ‘‘SEC. 4. AUTHORITY TO DENY OR REVOKE PASSPORT AND
4 PASSPORT CARD.
5 ‘‘(a) INELIGIBILITY.—
6 ‘‘(1) ISSUANCE.—The Secretary of State shall
7 not issue a passport or passport card to any indi8
vidual whom the Secretary has determined is a
9 member, or is attempting to become a member, of
10 an organization the Secretary has designated as a
11 foreign terrorist organization pursuant to section
12 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
13 U.S.C. 1189).
14 ‘‘(2) REVOCATION.—The Secretary of State
15 shall revoke a passport or passport card previously
16 issued to any individual described in paragraph (1).
17 ‘‘(b) RIGHT OF REVIEW.—Any person who, in ac18
cordance with this section, is denied issuance of a passport
19 or passport card by the Secretary of State, or whose pass20
port or passport card is revoked or otherwise restricted
21 by the Secretary of State, may request a due process hear22
ing not later than 60 days after receiving such notice of
23 the nonissuance, revocation, or restriction.’’.

Notice anything?

Section 2 - "Loss of Nationality" gives NO DUE PROCESS. It keeps the current law as is and makes no change to it. Again, the current law strips due process and only requires "preponderance of the evidence," not the tougher, "beyond a reasonable doubt" evidence.

Section 3 - Revocation or Denial of Passports or Passport Cards DOES give a due process hearing, if requested within 60 days of notice of nonissuance, revocation or restriction.

So while a person gets due process for a Passport issue; the major issue, loss of Nationality gives a person no such due process.

pdf version of bill - easier to read

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

After further review...

Here's the text of the updated amendment Cruz submitted in January:



Notice anything?

Section 2 - "Loss of Nationality" gives NO DUE PROCESS. It keeps the current law as is and makes no change to it. Again, the current law strips due process and only requires "preponderance of the evidence," not the tougher, "beyond a reasonable doubt" evidence.

Section 3 - Revocation or Denial of Passports or Passport Cards DOES give a due process hearing, if requested within 60 days of notice of nonissuance, revocation or restriction.

So while a person gets due process for a Passport issue; the major issue, loss of Nationality gives a person no such due process.

pdf version of bill - easier to read

You have posted the bill that has amendments to 8 U.S.C. 1481.

Notice the wording:

SEC. 2. Loss of nationality due to support of terrorism.

Section 349(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481(a)) is amended to read as follows:

Now look at what has been written, originally, which WASN'T necessary to amend:

§1481. Loss of nationality by native-born or naturalized citizen; voluntary action; burden of proof; presumptions

(b) Whenever the loss of United States nationality is put in issue in any action or proceeding commenced on or after September 26, 1961 under, or by virtue of, the provisions of this chapter or any other Act, the burden shall be upon the person or party claiming that such loss occurred, to establish such claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Any person who commits or performs, or who has committed or performed, any act of expatriation under the provisions of this chapter or any other Act shall be presumed to have done so voluntarily, but such presumption may be rebutted upon a showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the act or acts committed or performed were not done voluntarily.

(June 27, 1952, ch. 477, title III, ch. 3, §349, 66 Stat. 267 ; Sept. 3, 1954, ch. 1256, §2, 68 Stat. 1146 ; Pub. L. 87–301, §19, Sept. 26, 1961, 75 Stat. 656 ; Pub. L. 94–412, title V, §501(a), Sept. 14, 1976, 90 Stat. 1258 ; Pub. L. 95–432, §§2, 4, Oct. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 1046 ; Pub. L. 97–116, §18(k)(2), (q), Dec. 29, 1981, 95 Stat. 1620 , 1621; Pub. L. 99–653, §§18, 19, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3658 ; Pub. L. 100–525, §§8(m), (n), 9(hh), Oct. 24, 1988, 102 Stat. 2618 , 2622.

http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?r...tion:prelim%29

[n david]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

You have posted the bill that has amendments to 8 U.S.C. 1481.

Notice the wording:

Now look at what has been written, originally, which WASN'T necessary to amend:

But to whom is this preponderance of evidence presented? There is no statement of due process in that.

It's been shown the US government will disregard due process for any citizen it suspects of becoming a terrorist, to the point of using a drone attack against them.

Congress also authorized the government to arrest and indefinitely detain citizens suspected (no evidence needed, only suspicion) of colluding with terrorists with the NDAA.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

But to whom is this preponderance of evidence presented? There is no statement of due process in that.

Tt's been shown the US government will disregard due process for any citizen it suspects of becoming a terrorist, to the point of using a drone attack against them.

Congress also authorized the government to arrest and indefinitely detain citizens suspected (no evidence needed, only suspicion) of colluding with terrorists with the NDAA.

How do you interpret 8(D) NOT to be due process:

‘‘(D) violating section 2384 of such title by engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United
States, or to levy war against them, if and when such person is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.’’.

You are blowing smoke.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

How do you interpret 8(D) NOT to be due process:

‘‘(D) violating section 2384 of such title by engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United
States, or to levy war against them, if and when such person is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.’’.

You are blowing smoke.

No, not blowing smoke. Sure, there's due process...for the scenario prescribed. (7) is specific to one scenario and is not addressing the 8 USC 1481 as a whole. You're taking one paragraph and applying it to the whole, when that's not what it's about.

Look again.

(a) A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality—
(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or
(2) taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or
(3) entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign state if
(A) such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against the United States, or
(B) such persons serve as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer; or
(4)
(A) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years if he has or acquires the nationality of such foreign state; or
(B) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years for which office, post, or employment an oath, affirmation, or declaration of allegiance is required; or (5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State; or
(6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense; or
(7) committing any act of treason against, or attempting by force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States, violating or conspiring to violate any of the provisions of section 2383 of title 18, or willfully performing any act in violation of section 2385 of title 18, or violating section 2384 of title 18 by engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, if and when he is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.
(b) Whenever the loss of United States nationality is put in issue in any action or proceeding commenced on or after September 26, 1961 under, or by virtue of, the provisions of this chapter or any other Act, the burden shall be upon the person or party claiming that such loss occurred, to establish such claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Any person who commits or performs, or who has committed or performed, any act of expatriation under the provisions of this chapter or any other Act shall be presumed to have done so voluntarily, but such presumption may be rebutted upon a showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the act or acts committed or performed were not done voluntarily.

(7) is simply addressing one scenario where a person "engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow....if and when he is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction."

This is not in relation to the whole 8 USC 1481.

[Fionn mac Cumh]

Jeb Bush has the wrong last name to win an election.

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by Fionn mac Cumh

Jeb Bush has the wrong last name to win an election.

Agree

[n david]

Originally Posted by Fionn mac Cumh

Jeb Bush has the wrong last name to win an election.

His last name is the least of my worries, but certainly precludes me from ever considering to vote for him. He has the wrong policies to win an election.

[Esaias]

What is a court of competent jurisdiction? Some star chamber specially set up to "try" such cases? You really are naive PO if you think that language is any guaranty of due process. You obviously don't get how this works. The language you posted allows for ANY tribunal, operating under ANY rules, to establish the "legality" of such proceedings, as long as it the government sets it up and says it has jurisdiction.

EVERYTHING the soviet government did was "legal". Remember that.

These people do NOT get to their position unless they are compromised. If elections worked they'd be illegal.

[Esaias]

http://americandictators.blogspot.co...erica.html?m=1


"This is the "TEA Party Conservative" Ted Cruz plan. While pounding the drum that he is opposed to Amnesty and wants a Secure Border, Ted hopes you don't hear the next two amendments he wants to add to Senate Bill 744. Ted wants to more than double immigration to this country at a time when almost half of working age Americans are out of work.


If that's isn't enough, he wants to increase the H1B visa FIVE HUNDRED PERCENT. These are the visas for highly skilled workers, you know, the jobs you send your kids to college for so they can get one of those good jobs. But Ted Cruz wants those jobs to go to foreigners, not Americans.

And if that isn't enough, Ted Cruz wants to DOUBLE the general worker visa. If you can't afford to send your kids to college, don't worry, Ted has a plan to keep them at home too - he'll make sure any job they could get also goes to foreigners. This is an Act of War Against America and the very definition of Treason in the US Constitution. "

Details and video at the link.