[DiogenesLamp]

My money is on the courts going with what follows when Ted Cruz’s eligibility status is adjudicated. It is also likely that the Senate will pass a Sense of the Senate Resolution clearing him to run like the one they passed for McCain.

My money is on the courts having the same sort of judgement about this that they have about Roe v Wade, or Plessy v Fergusson. They will do the incompetent, but politically expedient thing.

Will you STOP introducing the courts into a discussion about Accuracy? It's a given that the courts are boobs, and no citation of them serves any useful purpose in this discussion. The courts will always give us the "Wong" answer.

The Courts deserve ridicule and contempt, not deference.

[Nero Germanicus]

I make no agreement to stop talking about the courts. While you may be talking about “accuracy,” I’m talking about real life opinions and findings,
Everybody whose side loses blames the judge and the courts for the defeat,

Keep putting your fingers in your ears and screaming “la la la” but those who are fighting the eligibility battles have relied EXCLUSIVELY on the judiciary as the venue to wage this Constitutional battle. And that’s after one of the very first Triers of Fact to look at this issue told the plaintiffs that Congress was the appropriate branch og governmebt to seek redress of grievances.

There have been 322 civil actions, appeals and Supreme Court cert petitions/applications for stays, injunctions or extraordinary writs.