Is the question of Cruz’s eligibility something we want to trust to the Supreme Court?

Coach is Right ^ | 1/15/16 | Kevin "Coach" Collins

[Oldpuppymax]

Should we be forced to trust our future to a Supreme Court ruling on Ted Cruz’s eligibility? Should we be made to stand by helplessly while John Roberts is blackmailed into voting against America again?

On its face there seems to be no question about Senator Ted Cruz’s eligibility to serve as president. Nevertheless, the matter has not ever been litigated anywhere; so characterizing it as settled law is not accurate and may be fraught with danger.

Those who support Senator Cruz want this question to go away. That’s very understandable; but wanting something to go away and seeing it actually disappear are two different things.

For those who want to see that no Democrat is elected in November, this is not an issue that can be merely dismissed as “a Trump dirty trick.”

Donald Trump is not the one threatening to sue Cruz over his eligibility. The enemy here is Florida Democrat Congressman Alan Grayson. Grayson is not just talk on this issue as his record shows. Grayson will file his lawsuit at the worst time for us.

Anyone who wants to hang the future of our country on a Supreme Court ruling about Senator Cruz’s eligibility ought to keep in mind that this is the same Supreme Court we were “sure” would not legalized same sex marriage but did. It is the same Court we were sure would kill Obamacare...

[TexasFreeper2009]

I am soooooo tired of this NON ISSUE.

NO ONE HAS STANDING to bring Cruz to court of this. Can we please focus on something, anything, that actually matters?

[Still Thinking]

Is the question of Cruz’s eligibility something we want to trust to the Supreme Court?

Probably not, since their guiding principle appears to be "What's good for Democrats, deviants, and fascists?", but if they render an opinion, I bet everyone on the right complies with it. Does the author offer an alternative approach?

[Jim Noble]

On its face there seems to be no question about Senator Ted Cruz's eligibility to serve as president.

OK, leave Cruz out of it.

Take anonymous candidate, 2032, liberal Democrat. Born to an alien father in a foreign land.

Do you SERIOUSLY believe there would be "no question on it's face" about that hypothetical person's NBC status?

[rktman]

Even sadder, do we want to trust ANYTHING to the current SCOTUS?

[CMAC51]

The issue may not be as straightforward to resolve as it may appear. You have to get in front of the Supreme Court to get a ruling and from what I have seen during the progress of the birther stuff with Obama, demonstrating standing is the major obstacle. As much as Grayson may be making noise, I don’t see where he would actually have standing unless Cruz is actually elected and sworn in, then disqualifying him would mean the VP would move up.

I am in no way a legal scholar though, so more qualified minds than mine may see other paths.

[Calpublican]

the SC has addressed this in side notes on other cases on more than one occasion. It is settled. Donald Trump is a real manipulator you got to give him that.

[RummyChick]

I am going to give you one better.

Duke of Marlborough - one rank under King

Arab Prince - direct descendant of The Great Prophet.

Grace Kelly’s children who were born into Royalty.

All had American mothers and were born in other countries.

[TexasCajun]

A one-trick pony, aren't ya!

[Calpublican]

Trump wants people to get all up about a nonissue so they won’t notice
his shallow knowledge and experience.
Maybe we should be discussing his practice of bribing officials (mostly Democrat) to build his business.
Learned it from his crooked father.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/11/23/ike-didn-t-like-trump-s-dad-at-all.html

[traderrob6]

Coach Collins, concern troll extraordinaire.

[kiltie65]

“Even sadder, do we want to trust ANYTHING to the current SCOTUS?”

Absolutely on point! Cruz would be better to bide his time until the next election, when a few more conservatives are on the Supreme Court thanks to the predicted regime change, to ask for this ruling. However, he’s “invested” in this run now so has to continue, but his candidacy is flawed and I think he has sunk his chances this time around.

[ripnbang]

This is now, what, Day 10 or 11 of this and it’s still being talked about and the polls are showing Trump increasing his lead in other states and a very tight race in Iowa.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

I'd bet the house that if the Supreme Court addressed this issue, it would conclude (correctly) that the phrase "natural born citizen" means a person who is a citizen at birth. It would further find that the Constitution left to the Congress the role of defining the rules for citizenship.

The most important thing about the Naturalization Act of 1790, and all the subsequent related Acts, is not the particular rules Congress established for being considered a citizen at birth. It was the mere fact that Congress was establishing rules at all, and that nobody appeared to dispute that was beyond the purview of Congress.

As I said, I'd bet the house on that result, and I'd guess that 95% of Constitutional lawyers would do the same.

[FreeReign]

You either have birth right citizenship, and you're natural born, or you earn your citizenship, which is the process of being naturalized.

There is no other possibility.

Cruz is an NBC.

[tophat9000]

Ok... I'm going to get slammed hard on this for asking this question.... but this is strictly about birth and natural citizen

On Obama.. his mother was an American citizen....his father was not... and the debate was if Obama was or was not born in the US ..if not Obama would not be eligible natural citizen (and I do think Obama is hiding something on this)

On Cruz...his mother was an American citizen....his father was not (at the time)....and there no debates Cruz was not born in the US....

So am I missing something?... was Cruz's father a naturalized US citizen at the time..or something else?

I love Cruz and despise Obama... but I must be intellectually honest about this.....

[Cboldt]

-- NO ONE HAS STANDING to bring Cruz to court of this. --

That is true now, well, his opponents in the prinmary have standing, but the GOP has certified Cruz to be qualified.

The combatant in an election contest can sue in state court, before the election, to have the name of an unqualified candidate removed from the ballot. All 57 states. What are the odds they all rule the same way?

The loser of an election contest may be able to sue on eligibility too.

Obama skated because McCain and the GOP conceded eligibility.

In this race, that Canadian birth certificate is a mighty easy target.

[Yosemitest]

LIBERAL DO NOT WANT THE ISSUE SETTLED.
LIBERALS WANT CONFUSION.
LIBERALS THRIVE ON CONFUSAION.

On the Meaning of "Natural Born Citizen",
MAR 11, 2015, Commentary by Neal Katyal & Paul Clement

... While the field of candidates for the next presidential election is still taking shape,
at least one potential candidate, Senator Ted Cruz, was born in a Canadian hospital to a U.S. citizen mother.^15×
15. See Monica Langley, Ted Cruz, Invoking Reagan, Angers GOP Colleagues But Wins Fans Elsewhere, Wall St. J. (Apr. 18, 2014, 11:36 PM), http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303873604579494001552603692.
Despite the happenstance of a birth across the border, there is no question that Senator Cruz has been a citizen from birth and is thus a "natural born Citizen" within the meaning of the Constitution.
Indeed, because his father had also been resident in the United States, Senator Cruz would have been a "natural born Citizen" even under the Naturalization Act of 1790.
Similarly, in 2008, one of the two major party candidates for President, Senator John McCain, was born outside the United States on a U.S. military base in the Panama Canal Zone to a U.S. citizen parent.^16×
16. See Michael Dobbs, John McCain's Birthplace, Wash. Post: Fact Checker (May 20, 2008, 6:00 AM), http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/05/john_mccains_birthplace.html [http://perma.cc/5DKV-C7VE].
Despite a few spurious suggestions to the contrary, there is no serious question that Senator McCain was fully eligible to serve as President,
wholly apart from any murky debate about the precise sovereign status of the Panama Canal Zone at the time of Senator McCain's birth.^17×
17. See, e.g., Laurence H. Tribe & Theodore B. Olson, Opinion Letter, Presidents and Citizenship, 2 J.L. 509 (2012).
Indeed, this aspect of Senator McCain's candidacy was a source of bipartisan accord.
The U.S. Senate unanimously agreed that Senator McCain was eligible for the presidency,
resolving that any interpretation of the natural born citizenship clause as limited to those born within the United States was "inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the 'natural born Citizen' clause of the Constitution of the United States,
as evidenced by the First Congress's own statute defining the term 'natural born Citizen.' "^18×
18. S. Res. 511, 110th Cong. (2008).
And for the same reasons, both Senator Barry Goldwater and Governor George Romney were eligible to serve as President although neither was born within a state.
Senator Goldwater was born in Arizona before its statehood and was the Republican Party's presidential nominee in 1964,^19×
19. See Bart Barnes, Barry Goldwater, GOP Hero, Dies, Wash. Post, May 30, 1998, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/daily/may98/goldwater30.htm [http://perma.cc/K2MG-3PZL].
and Governor Romney was born in Mexico to U.S. citizen parents and unsuccessfully pursued the Republican nomination for President in 1968.^20×
20. See David E. Rosenbaum, George Romney Dies at 88; A Leading G.O.P. Figure, N.Y. Times, July 27, 1995, http://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/27/obituaries/george-romney-dies-at-88-a-leading-gop-figure.html.

There are plenty of serious issues to debate in the upcoming presidential election cycle.
The less time spent dealing with specious objections to candidate eligibility, the better.
Fortunately, the Constitution is refreshingly clear on these eligibility issues.
To serve, an individual must be at least thirty-five years old and a "natural born Citizen."
Thirty-four and a half is not enough and, for better or worse, a naturalized citizen cannot serve.
But as Congress has recognized since the Founding, a person born abroad to a U.S. citizen parent is generally a U.S. citizen from birth with no need for naturalization.
And the phrase "natural born Citizen" in the Constitution encompasses all such citizens from birth.
Thus, an individual born to a U.S. citizen parent - - whether in California or Canada or the Canal Zone - - is a U.S. citizen from birth
and is fully eligible to serve as President if the people so choose.



---



* Paul and Patricia Saunders Professor of Law, Georgetown University.
** Distinguished Lecturer in Law, Georgetown University; Partner, Bancroft PLLC.

[tophat9000]

And let me add the only legal different I can see on Cruz and Obama non US citizen father

Obama' father was a citizen, a willing legal subject of a foreign country... and Obama may of been born in the fathers country

Cruz' father was a legal refugee alien in the US and no longer a subject of a foreign country... and Cruz was not born in the father country of origin

[Cboldt]

-- the SC has addressed this in side notes on other cases on more than one occasion. It is settled. --

Yeah, but how confident are you, that you understand which way?

I am 100% sure that all the caes so far, and they are numerous, would find Cruz to be naturalized. Before you crap all over me, I'm just the messanger. That's what the cases say.

The case of Rogers v. Bellei would not even exist, if Bellei was an NBC.