I'll take that — but I actually like Mr. Cruz, while I don't believe him to be eligible for President I think he'd be excellent as AG or possibly USSC Justice.*
We Know that Mr. Cruz was born in Canada and that, at the time, his father was a citizen of Cuba. The first is important because it eliminates the anchor-baby
problems** and because it then forces most of those asserting his eligibility to resort to statutes to support their claim, this destroys their claim though: Art I, Sec 8, Cl 4 clearly gives congress the power to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization
, nowhere else in the constitution is there anything touching on legislation for any type of citizenship, and Src 1 of Amd 14 does not grant congress additional powers. So, by appealing to a statute to assert Mr. Cruz's eligibility one is in fact asserting that he is a naturalized citizen and therefore not eligible.
I didn't give Obama a free pass on his credentials, and I'm not about to because our guy
is in a similar situation*** — we must respect the Constitution even, especially, when doing so would be inconvenient, else it means nothing, restraining only when we wish to be restrained.
* — Though there are arguments that there's more than enough lawyers on the USSC and it could do with some mathematician-/engineer-types who hold the Constitution in highest regard.
** — This arises from the USSC declaring that mere accident of the location of birth is enough to confer citizenship, I believe this from a mutilation of the 14th Amendment. (There's probably legislation in-play here too, given how long that opinion has been held by the political elite.)
*** — If Obama was born in HI, then he has that much above Cruz; if not, then the situations are very, very similar.
So after he's been elected, will you be joining all the other CDS demonstrators marching back and forth in front of the White House, wearing a billboard over your shoulders declaring all of your "legal" reasonings why he shouldn't be in there?