There is no precedent. Watch what happens if Ted Cruz gets the pubbie nomination.
All of a sudden the LSM will discover the NBC clause in the Constitution, conclude that it requires a US citizen mother AND US citizen father to comply with the clause and to insist that its essential to ensure, as well as possible, that the candidate will hold our country first in his or her heart. See Vattel’s Law of Nations for reference.
Not a birther - just a Constitutionalist.
Sigh.
You are correct.
There are two notions from English law that have lodged in American conversations that do not belong there.
“A jury of your peers”—In America, everyone is everyone else’s “peer.” There are no nobles or aristocrats or royalty.
“Precedent”—There is no such thing as “precedent” in legitimate Constitutional law. Yes, the courts consult the “precedents” set by higher courts, but the Constitution itself does not depend on “precedent,” as it does in England. In America, all that matters is the TEXT.
During the Monica scandal, talking heads constantly chattered about “no precedent,” meaning that some provision of the Constitution had never been USED before. As though nothing can be done unless it has been done before!
When an Article V Convention of the States becomes a real possibility, expect this nonsense about “no precedent” to be revived. We can’t have an Article V Convention because we’ve never had one before!