No question Ted Cruz is eligible to be president

No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.

It is easy to ignore the often-hateful blatherings of Donald Trump, but his questioning of Ted Cruz' eligibility to be president needs an answer. And that answer is a clear "yes."

Trump knows very well that Cruz is eligible, but in his desperation to stave off a surging Cruz candidacy The Donald will say anything.

Although he was born in Calgary, Canada in 1970, Ted Cruz is considered a "natural born" citizen of the United States because his mother was born in Delaware. His Cuban father was working in the Canadian oil fields when his son was born. Thus, the Texas senator was born a citizen of both the United States and Canada. He always has though of himself -- rightly -- as American, saying he didn't realize he had dual citizenship until it was pointed out by The Dallas Morning News in 2014. At that time, Cruz renounced his Canadian citizenship, although he could have kept it without endangering his eligibility to be America's president.

Despite claims by some Trump supporters -- who still are trying to prove that Barack Obama's birth in Hawaii of a Kenyan father and American mother makes him ineligible to be president -- Cruz does not hold a Canadian passport and, apparently, never has.

Two former Justice Department lawyers, in a Harvard Law Review article quoted in USA Today last March, said, "Despite the happenstance of a birth across the border, there is no question that Sen, Cruz has been a citizen from birth and is thus a 'natural born citizen' within the meaning of the Constitution,"

Neal Katyal, who was acting solicitor general in the Obama administration from May 2010 to June 2011, and Paul Clement, solicitor general from 2004 to 2008 in the George W. Bush administration, said, "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.

"Thus, an individual born to a U.S. citizen parent -- whether in California or Canada or the Canal Zone -- is a U.S. citizen from birth and is fully eligible to serve as president if the people so choose."

Surely Trump knows he is wrong about Cruz' eligibility, so why bring it up. Quite simply, Trump knows his poll numbers are ephemeral, that he has garnered just about all the supporters he is going to get. As Republican voters get serious about the election, they will settle for more serious, far more qualified canidates, including, possibly, Ted Cruz. TheTeflon Don's non-stick surface is beginning to peel.

There are many reasons to vote for Ted Cruz for president, and probably just as many not to. Like all candidates, he asks us to accept him, warts and all.

Whatever you think about Ted Cruz, he is eligible to be president of the United States -- and has been for a decade since he turned 35.

That’s the Harvard Law review opinion.
How many US SC rulings are unanimous?Supreme Court precedent: The courts have applied the partus sequitur patrem principle (citizenship by descent from one’s father) to determine who is, or who is not, a federal (U.S.) citizen at birth; but the meaning of natural born citizen appears to be a separate issue [21]. To this day, the Supreme Court, in its majority opinions, has consistently used the term “natural born citizen” only in reference to persons born on U.S. soil, to parents who are both U.S. citizens.

In Scott v. Sandford (1856), Justice Daniel’s concurring opinion characterized, as unexceptionable (beyond criticism or objection), the Vattelian Law of Nations view of citizenship, which includes:
“natural-born citizens are those born in the country of parents who are citizens” (Scott v. Sandford, 1856)

Despite older, no longer relevant definitions (such as the one that includes foreign born individuals that were here prior to the existence of the USA) the test for a NATURALIZED citizen includes not being a citizen prior to taking classes, passing a test and being sworn in. The ONLY other definition is an NBC, in which one is a citizen at birth due to the U.S. citizenship of at least one parent (no longer parent”S”). There is a mechanism in place to settle this issue from state to state where the Party (in this case the Republican Party) of the state CERTIFIES the candidates as qualified to appear on the ballot. For instance, on December 15, 2015 the Republican Party of Virginia CERTIFIED that Ted Cruz (as well as 12 others) were QUALIFIED to appear on the 2016 Republican Presidential Primary ballot. The Party, as well as the State, has an obligation to certify that the person running is eligible to do so.

So, if you have a beef with me, Rush and Levin on this issue please know you also have a beef with 50 states, the Republican Party state organizations for 50 states and the National Republican Party. Of all of those the 101 last mentioned are the most important and have the most legal responsibility to certify eligibility.

-- ... your opinion doesn't matter when it comes to his legal status. --

Butting in to make a nitpciky point, his opinion doesn't determine any legal outcome. It doesn't remove Cruz from the race. But, his opinion might matter if he won't vote for a candidate that he deems ineligible.

That dynamic plays out across the universe of voters.

“Butting in to make a nitpciky point, his opinion doesn’t determine any legal outcome. It doesn’t remove Cruz from the race. But, his opinion might matter if he won’t vote for a candidate that he deems ineligible.”

Correct! And, if like Obama, he had hired a team of lawyers, spent tons of money and legally put all of the information surrounding his birth and college career into a legal black hole people might be less inclined to vote for him. IF Cruz wins the primary it won’t matter. It’ll be him and Hildabeast.

I made that point a long time ago. My state is South Dakota.
I could break the law and vote a hundred times in SD and the Republican would still carry Sd.

In the battleground states is where the election will be won or lost.

My argument will be the enemedia’s message. The will go with it 24/7?
We will see how it flies there

4.4 Current Federal Statutes: Current Federal law, specifically Title 8 Section 1401, lists those who are U.S. citizens at birth (persons who acquire U.S. citizenship at the time of their birth), but does not specify persons who are U.S. citizens by birth [45].

The term natural born citizen is not found in any existing Federal statute. Although the U.S.-born child of a foreign-citizen parent is a U.S. citizen by modern-day policy, no existing Federal statute declares such a child to be a natural born citizen

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.