Posted on 03/21/2016 8:55:40 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
With all of the non-stop coverage of the 2016 presidential election, have you noticed as of late that Donald Trump has not said a peep about Ted Cruz not being eligible for the presidency? Earlier this year, Trump questioned whether Cruz was a natural born citizen because he was born in Calgary, Canada (to a U.S. citizen mother). Trump asserted this very question would be caught up in the court system for years. Much editorial space was spent on major newspaper and TV networks discussing this issue. Many legal scholars even agreed that Trump may have a case against Cruz.
This weekend, it occurred to me, this issue has faded from the public eye. The major media outlets stopped talking about it (maybe because Trump has moved on to other things.) But, it remains an important and largely unresolved question. So, I decided to look through some of the filings in the lawsuits filed against Cruz, and discovered an opinion from a Pennsylvania Senior Judge Dan Pellegrini that gives an absolute smack down to all of these Ted Cruz birther claims. Judge Pellegrini in his 22 page memorandum opinion found that Ted Cruz was a natural born citizen thereby ruling that Cruz's name can appear on the Republican primary ballot in Pennsylvania on April 26, 2016. Why this particular opinion piqued my interest is that it is the first I have seen anywhere that actually tackles the Constitutional questions surrounding Cruz's eligibility. For example, cases in Utah and Florida, were recently dismissed on procedural technicalities (like standing). What is even more shocking -- the opinion was issued last week -- and I couldn't find any major network or newspaper covering it. (WSJ had a short blog post, and a few local newspapers covered it in PA). You would think that on the heels of such extensive coverage of the issue earlier this year, that the media would jump all over the first major opinion to address these important Constitutional questions that Trump brought up during the campaign. I guess, that's wishful thinking, but I will go through the opinion, anyway, as I think it is illustrative of what will be found if/when this question is appealed to an even higher court, perhaps even the U.S. Supreme Court.
The heart of the question stems from Article II, Section I, of the U.S. Constitution which requires that a President be a "natural born" citizen. The challenge was filed by Carmon Elliot, a registered Republican in Pennsylvania. Elliot claimed Cruz should not be allowed to appear on the ballot because he is not a "natural born citizen."
Firstly, Cruz's attorneys argued that the Court should not address this issue at all because it is a "political question" that should not be addressed by the Judiciary. The judge found "no Constitutional provision places such power in Congress to determine Presidential eligibility." Bottom line (and this is important), the judge found that the courts can move forward with deciding the case.
So how did Judge Pellegrino of the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania arrive at his decision that Cruz was eligible?
The judge relies on several pieces of legal scholarship. First, a memo produced in 1968 by Charles Gordon, then the General Counsel of the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service, which says: "The Framers were well aware of the need to assure full citizenship rights to the children born to American citizens in foreign countries." He also points out a 2011 Congressional Research Service Memo entitled the "Qualification for President and the 'Natural Born' Citizenship Eligibility Requirement." The document concludes:
"The weight of legal and historical authority indicated that the term 'natural born' citizen would mean a person, who is entitled to U.S. citizenship 'by birth' or 'at birth' either by being born 'in' the United States and under its jurisdiction, even those born to alien parents; by being born abroad to U.S. citizen-parents."
Then the judge spends four pages quoting from the recent work of Paul Clement & Neal Katyal in the Harvard Law Review, in which the two Constitutional scholars (from different sides of the political aisle) conclude that "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."
In his conclusion, the Judge states:
Having extensively reviewed all articles cited in the opinion, as well as many others, this Court holds, consistent with the common law precedent and statutory history, that a "natural born citizen" included any person who is a United States citizen from birth.Accordingly, because he was a citizen of the United States from birth, Ted Cruz is eligible to serve as President of the United States..
The judge's decision is ripe for a higher court review, but it is significant nonetheless. As election law expert Dan Tokaji points out in the Election Law Blog this case could ultimately be headed for the U.S. Supreme Court.
"A state court ruling would be helpful, but only a Supreme Court ruling could dispel the uncertainty surrounding its meaning. The good news is that review of a state court decision on Cruz's eligibility could be sought in the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court's jurisdiction to review federal law questions is broader than that of lower federal courts," he wrote.
So perhaps, one thing Trump said is correct that this question could end being caught up in the courts for some time. The petitioner, Mr. Elliot, already said he plans to appeal the Judge's decision.
Here is his full decision for your review:
Ted Cruz Judge Decision PA March 10
(DOCUMENT-AT-LINK)
That is correct, McCain was not eligible either, fig leaf resolution notwithstanding. The Democrats used that fig leaf resolution as cover for getting The Usurper into office.
Barry Soetoro/Barack Hussein Obama should be proof enough of the wisdom of the founders when they tried to prevent him from being President by requiring someone who could only be a US citizen and nothing else.
Born here of citizen parents.
Naturally a US citizen because there is no other possibility.
One cannot be anything else and also be a natural born citizen.
Obama told us he was born a British Subject.
Who believes Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Jay, Monroe, Madison, etc. would have found him to be a natural born citizen?
Usurpation Day, January 20, 2009, happened with the complete cooperation of both parties.
They want the Constitution changed without the hassle of amending the Constitution.
Confuse people about the clear meaning of a three word phrase and voila, every anchor baby and Winston Churchill is eligible.
The bench was the reason the GOP went along with the fig leaf resolution for McCain that was used by the Democrats as cover for Obama.
Jindal, Rubio, Haley and Cruz were all up and comers and the future of the party and ineligible.
“The judge relies on several pieces of legal scholarship. First, a memo produced in 1968 by Charles Gordon, then the General Counsel of the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service, which says: “The Framers were well aware of the need to assure full citizenship rights to the children born to American citizens in foreign countries.” He also points out a 2011 Congressional Research Service Memo entitled the “Qualification for President and the ‘Natural Born’ Citizenship Eligibility Requirement.”
As a long lapsed lawyer I can tell you that the value of this as a legal argument is less than a warm bucket of spit. It’s the equivalent of saying 2d Division Vet said this or that. But it has to be gone through in order to get to the heart of the matter. Perhaps someday we might...
just another one of Trump’s memes to get press attention like casting aspersion on his fellow candidates’ religion and offering to pay legal fees for his supporters who beat up protestors. Too bad he doesn’t do constructive as well as he does destructive - he could have had a chance at getting the 1237 delegates.
There is a significant chance of the Supreme Court cheating Cruz.
Oxford Dictionary Second Edition
Volume X page 245
“1709 Act 7 Anne c. 5...The Children of all natural-born subjects, born out of the Liegeance of her Majesty...shall be deemed...to be natural-born Subjects of this Kingdom.”
That 1709 law was I believe what the founders would have gone by. Anne was Queen of England in 1709.
Anne’s law supports Cruz.
The 14th Amendment might be construed adversely:
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”
Cruz wasn’t born in the USA. So arguably under the 14th Amendment (alone), he would have to gain citizenship by naturalization.
Cruz could reduce the chance of this by having as a Vice President the leftist Supreme Court members despise - Trump.
My view of the 14th Amendment would just apply it the (freed) blacks in the USA and their offspring, just the people it was intended to help.
Well, to be fair, Trump is probably still deciding how he feels about the matter today. As opposed to yesterday, last week, last month, last year...
Interestingly, that resolution relied on McCain’s TWO citizen parents as rationale for his eligibility.
Cruz was born a Canadian citizen to a Cuban father who may have also been eligible to apply for American citizenship due to his mother. We have never seen paperwork that his parents may or may not have filed.
No way would the founders have thought him a natural born citizen.
I grow tired of your insults.
The federal courts will back away for two reasons. The first will be the explanation that it is a political question to be decided by elected officials. The second will be that no court is going to entertain arguments based on Constitutional originalism when the courts have systematically denied such arguments for a hundred years.
It ain’t law until the fat lady (SCOTUS) sings and she isn’t even tuned up yet.
Whaaaa.
I - and plenty of others - have called you out for the repeated thread posting.
Search is your friend. Not an insult....just a fact.
And you’re going to hammer it home no matter how many posts it takes?
In my opinion, even if Obama was born in Kenya and had an officially certified Kenyan birth certificate in his hand, he would still have been legally allowed to be the President of the USA for his two terms because Obama’s mom was an American citizen, on the same legal basis as Cruz, who was born in Canada.
Remember when thinking about the issue, naturalization does what nature didn’t.
No naturalization + undoubted US citizenship -> natural-born.
I call BS...because his father didn't become a citizen until 2005 and every single family paper would have been dragged out at that time and Cruz would have known.
There are still family records that are "protected".
Both his mother and father are listed on a Canadian voting list. So they both must have become Canadian citizens....and Canada didn't allow dual citizenship at that time.
Mrs. Cruz didn’t have time to become a Canadian citizen at Ted’s birth. Several Canadian FReepers have attested to that.
I believe the hospital was USA flagged.
Until the left goes legal on the the issue! Then this decision will be mute!
Raul: Please, please, don’t hold Obama for ransom!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.