Turns out all the super lawyer stuff is just smoke and mirrors, more marketing than reality.
How was he going to do that? Courts act retrospectively on stuff like this. That is to say, they wait until something happens and then decide what to do about it. They aren't going to deal with hypotheticals or what ifs.
And to bring a case to court you have to argue that you were wronged in some way. Maybe I don't quite have it right, but you could file suit to get Ted off the ballot if you don't think he's eligible, and he could file suit if he's kept off the ballot, but he can't file suit to ensure that nobody ever kicks him off.
What I'm trying to say is that sometimes there isn't an immediate legal resolution of difficulties you might face -- even if you are a "super lawyer."
Not necessarily. See restraining orders. Courts will act to prevent harm, for example to prevent an environmental hazard from damaging adjacent property or public property (waterways, ground water).
I do agree that a suit relating to ballot access depends on a threat to that access, and there is positively no threat. Cruz has been certified eligible, and the presumption is conclusive for ballot access purposes. Nobody has standing - the issue is decided already, conclusively.
Some people don't like that, and they have good reasons, wanting a guarantee that all the candidates are eligible. Tough cookies. The law says that certification is conclusive, period, end of discussion.