As for you admonition that I "grow up and deal with things the way they are," I see the NBC clause as dead, now, anyway. At least for as long as Congress ignores it and courts and SCOTUS refuse to deal with it. There is no downside to the constitution, seeking a ruling.
But you should be a realist too, and ponder that if SCOTUS writes the NBC clause out of the constitution (by allowing naturalized citizens to hold the office), then SCOTUS is effectively amending the constitution - a role it is not given. If it rules according to all of it's precedents, according to the constitution, the NBC clause lives, and Cruz's hopes do not.
Feeling lucky? What are the odds? How confident are you, that the court is ready to reverse 200+ years of rock solid precedent to save Cruz's bacon, and change the constitution in a way that is RADICALLY different from what that document says.
From my point of view, you believe he is qualified. Fine with me. My conscience is clear as a bell on this subject.
David, I have no more to say to you, and if I happen to be on one of your "reply" or "ping" lists, please remove me. I notice many names in the "to" line and have trying to make sure to reply to all of you.
But you should be a realist too, and ponder that if SCOTUS writes the NBC clause out of the constitution (by allowing naturalized citizens to hold the office), then SCOTUS is effectively amending the constitution - a role it is not given. If it rules according to all of it's precedents, according to the constitution, the NBC clause lives, and Cruz's hopes do not.
Feeling lucky? What are the odds? How confident are you, that the court is ready to reverse 200+ years of rock solid precedent to save Cruz's bacon, and change the constitution in a way that is RADICALLY different from what that document says.
Sorry, but I make a practice of never letting the other side get the last word in any kind of argument to which I have a clear response.
You start by conceding that the issue is really a dead non issue; then want to have the point that it is somehow a risk that the Supreme Court might declare it dead anyway. You really can't have it both ways.
If I were running the legal action, I would endeavor to use the current situation to my advantage. It looks to me as though this may turn out to modify the rule from born under the sovereignty of the several states to statutory citizenship at birth. Under that rule, Cruz is eligible but Barry is not. So I would like to take that result if I were in charge of getting it.
As to the rest of your point about the Supreme Court, the Court is really the weakest link in the checks and balances system. If we were going to consider modification of the Constitution, some thought should be given to how to address that problem.
Because there is a whole laundry list of Supreme Court decisions that really have no foundation in the Constitution or the body of underlying law and history. Jones & Laughlin Steel is in my mind the most egregious; but there is an extended line of other examples--King v. Burwell and the original Obamacare decision are both outrageous.
I don't see getting a decision in our favor in the Natural Born Clause to get our choice of President in office as being nearly as bad--particularly under the circumstances in which you can envisage the trade.