I, too, am disappointed. Would a true conservative jeopardize the nation is such a manner? Surely he **knows** that the Marxo-Demo-Proggies will use his questionable eligibility at an optimal time to inflict maximum damage on the Republicans.
Cruz's actions are the behavior of an ambitious opportunist and weasel.
Does Cruz seriously believe that the Founders would consider a person Natural Born who was born in a foreign country, lived there several years, did not renounce his foreign citizenship until the moment he chose to run for president,was born to an American woman who **voted** in foreign elections, and whose father was Cuban?
Unbelievable!
That's just an emotional rant which doesn't get anywhere in terms of the discourse.
There is no controlling authority on the question of what constitutes a natural born citizen under Article II, Sec. 1; the Supreme Court decides on the facts presented whether or not the individual is eligible.
And the Court, as a general interpretative proposition ignores legislative history in favor of its own reading of the words on the paper.
There is no doubt that there is momentum to expressly modify the Constitution to define who meets the test. At present, the general direction of the media and the academics is that a nationalist US definition is no longer appropriate in our global world environment. That view is driven by Liberal support for the guy in the White House who is not eligible by any definition. If the Liberals get their guy to impose an unconstitutional culture on America, I get my guy to unravel it. Although I could be persuaded Trump might do it; I believe Cruz, if elected, would do it.
That may or may not be a majority view in the country--most of America thinks Judge Judy is on the Supreme Court; people don't really have a clue what is involved.
As a general proposition, I probably would be fairly close to your view--born in the geographical territory of the admitted states. But in the case of Cruz, I think he is probably the best quality candidate for President so I hope he is not held ineligible.
As to what the founders might have thought, their legislative drafting could have been a much better job--on the commerce clause; the second amendment; and maybe the first amendment too. The legal work was poorly done.
However the Court ignores the history of various clauses in favor its own reading of the words. The only specific reliable legislative history on the provision is a letter from John Jay to George Washington which probably supports the born in the admitted states interpretation; certainly specifically in the case of Canada.
In this case, that won't carry the day I don't think. But it is a close call which could have been addressed and resolved by Cruz in the last twelve to fifteen months in which everyone on our side was attempting to sweep the issue under the rug.