Ted Cruz

[Phantasmal]

There are more Constitutional scholars coming out questioning the "natural born" citizenship of the Senator.
His teacher is one of those who says Cruz is not eligible. Is this a Trump conspiracy or is this a Establishment Republican conspiracy trying to bring Cruz down via not a natural born citizen?

Whose conspiracy will win this conspiracy battle.

[Leonthecat]

There are more Constitutional scholars coming out questioning the "natural born" citizenship of the Senator.
His teacher is one of those who says Cruz is not eligible. Is this a Trump conspiracy or is this a Establishment Republican conspiracy trying to bring Cruz down via not a natural born citizen?

Whose conspiracy will win this conspiracy battle.

Raphael "Ted" Cruz is absolutely ineligible to run for the presidency.
There is now evidence that his mother voted in Canada taking him one more step away from claiming American citizenship. His mother did not work for the US government or military and the birth took place in a foreign country not in a territory or property of the USA.
Though he may be "naturalized" that is not "natural born". The constitution is quite specific on this. There isn't much room for "interpretation".
The requirement for senator is much lower than what the constitution calls for in the eligibility for a presidential candidate.
If he were to win the GOP nomination only one state would have to question his eligibility to be on the ballot and the race would be over.
To bad. Cruz would be easier to beat in the general, though Trump isn't going to be very hard to shellac either.

[Minister of Truth]

People are mostly challenging Cruz because of the challenges to Obama, as well as McCain, that have placed the topic firmly in the public eye for some time.

[canceled.2021.1]

lol

Look at the lefty birthers

Good stuff. They are orgasmic over this. Personally I think somebody should sue so this is over

[Leonthecat]

lol

Look at the lefty birthers

Good stuff. They are orgasmic over this. Personally I think somebody should sue so this is over

Raphael will only sue when some state refuses to put him on the ballot because of his ineligibility.
Then he will lose.
You like your fellow losers, don't you, ILA.
LOL

[christiefan915]

lol

Look at the lefty birthers

Good stuff. They are orgasmic over this. Personally I think somebody should sue so this is over

Pay attention, somebody did sue.

"A Texas attorney has filed a lawsuit questioning Ted Cruz’s eligibility to serve as president. The federal case filed in Texas argues that the question must be presented to the Supreme Court for fair adjudication instead of left up to popular consensus.

“The U.S. Constitution is not a popularity document for fair weather only,” says the lawsuit filed by Newton Schwartz."

[Leonthecat]

Ted Cruz is not eligible to run for president: A Harvard Law professor close-reads the Constitution
The closer you study the Constitution, the weaker Ted Cruz's case squares with the actual meaning of "natural-born"



The argument that Ted Cruz is eligible to run for president initially looked strong, then probable but uncertain. But closer examination shows it is surprisingly weak.

The constitutional text provides that a president, unlike other elected officials, must be a “natural born citizen.” This language could not mean anyone born a citizen or else the text would have simply stated “born citizen.” The word “natural” is a limiting qualifier that indicates only some persons who are born citizens qualify. Moreover, when the Constitution was enacted, the word “natural” meant something not created by statute, as with natural rights or natural law, which instead were part of the common law.

At common law, “natural born” meant someone born within the sovereign territory with one narrow exception. The exception was for children of public officials serving abroad, which does not help Cruz because his parents were not serving the United States when he was born in Canada. The case of John McCain was entirely different because he was born in a U.S. territory (the Panama Canal Zone) and to U.S. parents who were serving the U.S. military.

The argument for Cruz rests on some old statutes, namely English statutes enacted before the U.S. Constitution and U.S. statutes enacted just after. But neither turns out to be persuasive on closer examination.

The English statutes extended natural-born status to persons born abroad whose father was any English subject, rather than only a public official. Some argue that the constitutional framers meant to refer to this statutory redefinition of the term “natural born.” But that position contradicts the ordinary meaning that the word “natural” indicates a non-statutory meaning. Moreover, Prof. Mary McManamon offers convincing evidence that the Framers meant the common law meaning. James Madison himself said in 1789 that the U.S. used the place of birth rather than parentage. In any event, Cruz’s father was not a U.S. citizen when he was born (again unlike McCain), so these English statutes do not help Cruz.

The U.S. statute in 1790 provided that “children of citizens of the United States” that are born abroad “shall be considered as natural born Citizens.” This has been thought the strongest evidence for Cruz’s position since so many 1790 congressmen had participated in the Constitutional Convention. However, this statute did not say these children were natural-born citizens. It instead carefully said they “shall be considered as” natural-born citizens, suggesting that Congress thought they were not natural-born citizens but should be treated as such. Indeed, there would have been no need to pass the statute if they were already understood to be natural-born citizens.

Further, when this Act was reconsidered in a few years, Madison himself pointed out that Congress only had constitutional authority to naturalize aliens, not U.S. citizens, and reported a bill that amended the statute to eliminate the words “natural born” and simply state that “the children of citizens of the United States” born abroad “shall be considered as citizens.” This indicates that Madison’s view was that children born abroad of U.S. citizens were naturally aliens, rather than natural born citizens, and thus could be naturalized by Congressional statute but should not be called “natural born.” Congress adopted this amendment in 1795.

The contrary position also has two difficulties. It defines a “natural-born citizen” to mean anyone who Congress has defined to be a citizen at birth; that is, anyone born a citizen. This effectively reads the word “natural” out of “natural born citizen.” It also means Congress can by statute change the constitutional limit on who can run for president, when the whole point of constitutional limits is typically that Congress cannot change them.

In short, both textualism and originalism cut strongly against Cruz being a natural-born citizen. Some argue that living theories of constitutional interpretation cut in favor of Cruz, but even living theories start with text and history, and it is not clear why the principle animating the clause would merit a different conclusion in current times. Presumably modern equal protection norms would bar a sexist rule that said children born abroad with one U.S. parent were natural born only if that parent were a man. But that is no argument against the interpretation that persons are natural born citizens only if born in a U.S. territory or to a parent serving the U.S. abroad.

The concern at the time was obviously that foreign-born persons might not be as loyal to the U.S. One might think that concerns about disloyalty are odd for persons who have lived in the U.S. as citizens for a long time, but that oddity was also true at the founding. Moreover, no one claims the clause means that naturalized citizens (who may have lived in the U.S. since they were small children) are eligible to run for president, even though they had to do far more to prove their loyalty to the U.S. than someone born abroad who happened to have one U.S. citizen parent.

The line between those born in the U.S. versus abroad to U.S. parents certainly seems debatable. But it is no less sensible than the alternative line between those born abroad to U.S. parents versus those have been naturalized citizens for decades. This is one of those issues where general principles (even living ones) do not dictate any particular dividing line, and we need some technical fixed rule. Unfortunately for Ted Cruz, that technical rule does not permit his candidacy.
http://www.salon.com/2016/01/20/ted_..._constitution/

[Leonthecat]

Ted should drop out now.

[Leonthecat]

Cruz is falling fast.
Republicons realized he is ineligible.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/cruz-g...220708246.html

[evince]

Ted Cruize is chenny level evil

even the right knows it

[kaz]

Raphael "Ted" Cruz is absolutely ineligible to run for the presidency.
There is now evidence that his mother voted in Canada taking him one more step away from claiming American citizenship. His mother did not work for the US government or military and the birth took place in a foreign country not in a territory or property of the USA.
Though he may be "naturalized" that is not "natural born". The constitution is quite specific on this. There isn't much room for "interpretation".
The requirement for senator is much lower than what the constitution calls for in the eligibility for a presidential candidate.
If he were to win the GOP nomination only one state would have to question his eligibility to be on the ballot and the race would be over.
To bad. Cruz would be easier to beat in the general, though Trump isn't going to be very hard to shellac either.

You birthers are demented. I said not only was Obama eligible to run, he was eligible if he had been born in Kenya. Base hypocrisy is just part of being a leftist. Has to be. Your ideas are stupid and contradicted by all empirical evidence. So you have to justify them with lies, hypocrisies and ad hominem

[Jarod]

He is clearly an American and eligible to be president, in my opinion. He was born to an American living abroad.

That being said the man is insane. Cruz would be more dangerous as President than Trump.

I prefer Trump to Cruz and luckily it looks like the majority of Republican voters agree with me.

[evince]

I agree

If they determine hes not eligible then we should change the laws to make him eligible and for anyone in that situation.


cons would NEVER do it that way.

Its what makes the left way better people

[evince]

You birthers are demented. I said not only was Obama eligible to run, he was eligible if he had been born in Kenya. Base hypocrisy is just part of being a leftist. Has to be. Your ideas are stupid and contradicted by all empirical evidence. So you have to justify them with lies, hypocrisies and ad hominem

sure you did

[Jarod]

Don't get me wrong, he is a natural born citizen, in my opinion.

Its funny though, he has less going for him than Obama did, he was actually not born in the United States.

Had Obama truly been born in Kenya, then he would be sitting in Cruz's situation.