Posted on 01/12/2016 3:03:50 PM PST by Isara
HUDSON, N.H. — Ted Cruz on Tuesday went further than ever in needling Donald Trump, suggesting Democrats are behind the billionaire's questions about his citizenship.
Speaking with reporters after a rally here, the U.S. senator from Texas was asked what he thought of Trump citing Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe's analysis that Cruz might be ineligible to be president. Trump has pounced on Cruz's Canadian birth to cast doubt on whether he is a natural-born citizen.
“I will say it is more than a little strange to see Donald relying on as authoritative a liberal, left-wing, judicial activist Harvard law professor who is a huge Hillary supporter," Cruz replied. "It starts to make you think, ‘Gosh, why are some of Hillary’s strongest supporters backing Donald Trump?’"
Cruz then suggested Democrats were supporting Trump as a way of propping up a Republican they believe they can beat in the general election.
"You know, the last couple of elections, you’ll recall the Democrats got the nominee they wanted to run against in the general election," Cruz said. "It seems the Hillary folks are very eager to support Donald Trump and the attacks that are being tossed my direction.'"
The remarks represent Cruz's sharpest turn yet on Trump, whom he has refused to criticize for months, even as the billionaire has sharpened his attacks against Cruz. The two are now locked in a tight race in Iowa, the first-in-the-country caucus state.
Trump has been raising questions about whether Cruz is a natural-born citizen, which the Constitution requires for someone to serve as president. Cruz has insisted the legal question is straightforward: He argues his mother's U.S. citizenship (she's from Delaware) makes him a natural-born citizen, even if he was born in Calgary and his father is from Cuba.
Tribe, whom taught constitutional law to Cruz at Harvard, has said the issue is not as cut and dry, recently telling The Guardian that questions about Cruz's eligibility to be president are "murky and unsettled." Trump has favorably cited Tribe's analysis more than once, calling the professor a "constitutional expert, one of the best in the country," during a rally Monday in New Hampshire.
Tribe, viewed as one of the top liberal law professors in the country, has a long history of donating to Democratic candidates and causes. He did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Cruz is back in the Granite State for the first time in two months. He plans to hold another event later Tuesday afternoon, a town hall in Londonderry.
If anyone thinks the rats won’t use this to derail him, kindly review what they’ve done in the past to win.
************************************************************************
The ‘RATS will definitely make an issue of the number of non-citizens Trump employs in his STATESIDE businesses. He should get that issue cleared up & resolved NOW.
I will not be surprised to see her taken out one more time by their own.
The sad thing about the dems (NOT!) is just how bad their candidates really are.
I can't imagine how bad it would be for them without the MSM axis of evil on their side.
If Trump wins, and they actually bring that up, it would be gone in a few days, or maybe in less than one.
I presume you didn't see my first post on this, and you don't know that I prefer Cruz.
Grayson. Ugh! Thank you for the name. I couldn’t think of his name at the moment. Yes, “certifiable”, is the word for it.
Now about the Cruz citizenship issue— I was reading elsewhere that Rick Sanchez (former CNN afternoon anchor) who is also an immigrant, explains that Rafael Cruz is Cuban, that though Mrs. Cruz is American born, he emphasizes that Rafael was not.
Now the two of them go to Canada, they reside in Canada of their own free will, and Mrs. Cruz becomes eligible to vote in Canada, becomes politically active there, and did vote in Canada.
The only way, according to Sanchez, that anyone inherits voting rights in Canada is through obtaining Canadian citizenship.
Sanchez claims that Ted Cruz is then born to a Cuban father and a Canadian-citizen mother.
Neither parent resided on American territory, while in Canada, nor were they serving in any capacity the interests of the USA while there. (As in the case of Senator John McCain, born in Panama, on a military base, to a parent serving in the American military and on assignment).
You can see where this is going and that if it is to be settled at all, once and for all, the questions of dual citizenship have to be clarified. Ted did not apply for Canadian citizenship, nor could he apply for American citizenship at his birth.
People are going to want to understand this argument about “dual citizenship”, “naturalization”. John McCain’s situation was a piece of cake. Ted’s is more complicated, because he loses the cover of his parents being on an American assignment to a foreign country and he was not born on an American territory in Canada, as in McCain’s case.
In fact, it was only very recently that Cruz untangled himself from his Canadian citizenship.
The government should have settled this thing once and for all, so these arguments don’t come up again and again.
Under the Electoral College system, Cruz would have no standing to bring the matter before the Supreme Court until he was actually elected President. Cruz is not really running for President and neither is anyone else. Cruz is running to have the opportunity to select a set of Electors to go to the Electoral College and cast votes in his name.
The issue of eligibility is first raised at the Electoral College. If the electors determine that a candidate does not meet the eligibility requirements, then they should not vote for that person or abstain from voting on principle (we see a lot of those "principled" people here). If after the votes are cast, Cruz is elected, then the matter is referred to Congress who has the opportunity to once again check to see if Ted Cruz meets the eligibility requirements. If Congress votes to certify the election then Ted Cruz becomes president. The Supreme Court has no jurisdiction after that to undo the election. Marbury v. Madison did not give the power to the Supreme Court to undo a presidential election after it is certified by congress, nor does the Supreme Court have the authority to rule on the eligibility of a candidate to take office. The Constitution is clear that in regard to the eligibility of anyone to serve in Congress or the Presidency, the power to make that determination is solely in the Legislative body.
Ted Cruz would be an idiot to even try to bring a suit for declaratory judgment as to his eligibility.
The Congress is not going to undo the election and neither is the Electoral College. This is a complete and total non-issue. But then there are the purists that would rather see America go into the toilet than to have someone elected with solid conservative credentials and a questionable pedigree.
The founders didn't support giving slaves the right to have any form of liberty much less citizenship based on soil.
I think an argument could be made that the 14th Amendment rendered the Natural Born Citizen clause void simply because the Natural Born Citizen clause was intended (in whole or in part) to ensure that the children of Indians and Slaves were not considered eligible for the office of Presidency. Therefore any provision of the Constitution that would have prevented a Slave or the Children of Slaves from being considered eligible for president would be void under the 14th Amendment. All other references to slavery or limitations on the rights of slaves were rendered void under that amendment.
As I said, the NBC clause never served it's intended purpose (to ensure undivided loyalty) and at this point is nothing more than a relic (some dead bone worshipped by people who have given up the ability to think).
Just remind yourself how many cases have been brought forth, and won, by libs going to court.
It's inconceivable you don't think this is one of the ways libs win. They win through lawfare as much or more than any of their other tactics.
I don’t see any natural or logical connection between the NBC clause and preventing minorities from being elected president.
Native Americans are really a non-issue, because at the time they were at war with them, and they truly did consider them a separate nation.
Slaves were an issue, but only because they existed at the time, not because of where they were born.
I am not among those who think that Congress does not have the power to define issues in the area of naturalization. It’s a constitutional authority.
However, it is of interest to me that Washington would not have accepted Cruz as an NBC. I think your post agrees with that if I read between the penumbras and lines.
THAT point, though, makes Cruz vulnerable, and time will show us, especially in a conservative primary, how many votes it peels off. We need to know that.
My hypothetical a while ago gives some idea of what a campaign ad could look like. I think it would be a bombshell.
The libs will not bring it to court because they want the issue, they don't want the decision.
Regardless, there is no Constitutional Authority for a court to rule on the eligibility of a candidate for President. Under our Electoral College system, the nomination for President occurs for the first time at the meeting of the Electoral College. The Electoral college is charged with determining eligibility and if they find him eligible, the only body capable of overturning their judgment is Congress.
Now give me a legitimate Constitutional argument that would give any liberal "standing" to challenge Ted Cruz's eligibility before he is actually nominated at the Electoral College.
But you haven't.
Demanding I give you anything because we disagree is pretty lame.
Soldier on, and have a nice day.
I simply asked for you to provide me with a constitutional argument for your position. That is not unreasonable. I gave you my opinion based on the Constitution and my 29 years of experience as a practicing attorney.
I've dealt with a number of irrational attorneys, and trust me, you're not always right.
ping to comment.
“John McCain’s situation was a piece of cake.”
If you dig into McCain’s birth you’ll see he was not born in the American Canal Zone, but in a hospital outside the Canal Zone. To be specific it was Colon Hospital, City of Colon, which is not part of the Canal Zone. McCain was not eligible to be president.
John McCain was born in a military hospital in the Canal Zone in Panama (American Base, but still on sovereign Panamanian soil) but that didn’t stop him from running for the presidency as a natural born American. His father was active duty military, so his son was considered natural born American regardless of his place of birth.
I did not know that. Sanchez’ opinion was poorly sourced on that detail.
However, he also made the point that the McCain parents were Americans, on assignment by the US military, which protects American birthrights for newborns of military personnel stationed abroad, or on foreign soil, and confers infant citizenship.
Cruz’ has none of these advantages, which is what made it easier for the Senate to give McCain a clarifying pass of eligibility for his presidential run. Right?
I don’t really care where McCain was born because both his parents were American citizens when he was born. But like I said I have researched it and McCain was born in Colon Hospital, in the City of Colon, outside the Canal Zone.
Dallas morning news and Breitbart have Cruz’ birth cert and his mom’s .
_____________________
What does having birth certificate have to do with being a natural born American citizen? Cruz is not a natural born U.S. citizen & he should drop out.
So you are telling me that the son of a Cuban, born in Canada to an American mother is a natural born citizen (NBC) of the USA? LOL, no freaking way. Prior to 1934 Ted Cruz would not have any claim to US citizenship, no way Canadian Ted. eh, is an NBC of the USA. He is a naturalized citizen via the 1934 statute, period.
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.