Ted Cruz Is A 'Natural Born Citizen,' Board (Illinois) Of Election Finds

Huffington Post ^ | 02/02/2016 06:37 pm ET | Cristian Farias

[11th Commandment]

On the same day he won the Republican Iowa caucus, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas got a favorable decision from the Illinois Board of Elections, which ruled that he met the citizenship criteria to appear on the state's primary ballot.

Two objectors, Lawrence Joyce and William Graham, had challenged Cruz's presidential bid with the board, contending that his name should not appear on the March 15 ballot because his candidacy did not comply with Article II of the Constitution.

In response to the filings, Cruz's lawyers relied on Supreme Court precedent, legal history and articles from noted constitutional scholars to defend the view that he is in fact "natural born" within the meaning in the Constitution.

[No Dems 2016]

I still think that Ted Cruz needs to get this issue resolved in court. If not, the Dems will do their utmost to damage him with it. It probably contributed to his narrow rather than large victory in Iowa.

[butterdezillion]

Congress cannot “settle” Constitutional interpretation.

It has to do with the checks and balances, which is why the Constitution was written the way it was. Otherwise, why the heck would SCOTUS even have any cases? Congress already decided the Constitutionality of Obamacare; it’s settled. Congress has already decided the Constitutionality of gay marriage, abortion, etc... because they passed laws and that’s all it takes to settle Constitutionality, eh?

We have 3 branches for a reason. The Founders took this very seriously.

[diamond6]

“I still think that Ted Cruz needs to get this issue resolved in court. If not, the Dems will do their utmost to damage him with it. It probably contributed to his narrow rather than large victory in Iowa.”

YAWN...

[Yosemitest]

My pleasure.
You can lead a Jack@$$ to water (knowledge), but you can't force 'em to drink !

[nascarnation]

That seems reasonable.

Cruz at worst case is still an American in the North American sense of the word (Cuba/Canada).

I’m still convinced Baraq is from Kenya.

[TigerClaws]

Had Cruz’s mother not gone to the Embassy and filed out the right form after he was born in Canada, would Trump be a citizen today?

IF the answer to that is no = not a NBC.

Cruz owes his citizenship to the naturalization process.

[bushpilot2]

[editor-surveyor]

.
You are making a fool of yourself.
.

[diamond6]

“As did the FR Putinistas, who all seem to be big Trump supporters.”

Ah! You think???

[fooman]

Exactly. Didnt work in Iowa.

Wonder how much the NH polls close once Rubio and Cruz bite into Trump’s leads.

Maybe they split the delegates in the NH like they did IA — even if Trump wins by some margin.

[diamond6]

It seems the birthers have a slight agenda that they will never let go.

Why do you Trumpbots see if you can just win LEGITIMATELY.

Oh, that’s right. You can’t.

[Yosemitest]

"I still think that Ted Cruz needs to get this issue resolved in court.
If not, the Dems will do their utmost to damage him with it."

You wished! < /sarc>

"An Un-Naturally Born Non-Controversy":

... The Constitution, federal law, and the historical understanding of the Framers, as well as prior British legal traditions and law, all support this view.
In a recent article in the Harvard Law Review, two former U.S. Solicitor Generals, Paul Clement (who served under President George W. Bush) and Neal Katyal (who served under President Barack Obama) stated:

All the sources routinely used to interpret the Constitution confirm that the phrase “natural born Citizen” has a specific meaning:
namely, someone who was a U.S. citizen at birth
with no need to go through a naturalization proceeding at some later time.
And Congress has made equally clear from the time of the framing of the Constitution to the current day that,
subject to certain residency requirements on the parents,
someone born to a U.S. citizen parent generally becomes a U.S. citizen without regard to whether the birth takes place in Canada, the Canal Zone, or the continental United States.

Thus, former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger would not be eligible to run for president
because the Austrian native had to go through the naturalization process to become a U.S. citizen.

Certainly the Framers of the Constitution held this view of “natural born” citizen.
They had a deep understanding of British common law and applied its precepts, particularly as explained in Blackstone’s Commentaries, throughout the Constitution.
The U.S. Supreme Court in Smith v. Alabama (1888) recognized that
“the interpretation of the Constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that
its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law,
and are to be read in the light of its history.”

Senator Cruz meets all three qualifications in the Constitution to be the president of the United States
if the American people make that choice.

One of those precepts of British law was
that children born to British citizens anywhere in the world,
even outside the dominions of the British Empire,
were “natural born” citizens of the Empire
who owed their allegiance to the Crown.
This historical understanding is explained in great detail by the Supreme Court in a well-known 1898 case, U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark.

The First Congress, which included many of the Framers of the Constitution, codified this view of a natural born citizen.
A mere three years after the Constitution was drafted, they passed the Naturalization Act of 1790,
which specified that the children of U.S. citizens born
“out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens.”
The modern version of this Act is found at 8 U.S.C. §1401.
It contains a list of all individuals who are considered “nationals and citizens of the United States at birth.”
Paragraph (g) includes:

A person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien,
and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions
for a period or periods totaling not less than five years,
at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years. 

Ted Cruz was born in Canada in 1970;
his mother, who was a U.S. citizen by birth from Delaware, was in her 30s at the time.
She met Cruz’s father, who was born in Cuba, as a student at Rice University.
These facts show that
Cruz’s family background clearly meets the standard set out in the federal statute for being a natural born citizen who did not have to go through any naturalization process to become a citizen.;
That was also the case for Senator Barry Goldwater, who was born in Arizona before it became a state,
and Governor George Romney, who was born in Mexico.

The bottom line is that Senator Cruz meets all three qualifications in the Constitution to be the president of the United States if the American people make that choice.
The same is true of my wife, who was born in Manila.
Her father, whose family had been in America since shortly after the Pilgrims got to Massachusetts,
was temporarily working abroad for an American company—just like Ted Cruz’s father.

My wife is not likely to run for president,
but there is no question that she—like Ted Cruz, Barry Goldwater, George Romney, and John McCain—is eligible to be president
and to swear an oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”


Hans A. von Spakovsky is a a former commissioner on the Federal Election Commission and Justice Department lawyer. 
He is the coauthor of “Who’s Counting? How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote at Risk”(Encounter 2012)
and  “Obama’s Enforcer: Eric Holder’s Justice Department” (HarperCollins/Broadside 2014).

[I want the USA back]

The left will bring up the issue again during the campaign.

[Outlaw76]

It would be grand wouldn't it.

but...

Whose voice would you listen to?
A liberal judge? — no. No matter what he said.
A conservative judge? — no. “He's not an authority”
A State supreme court? — no. “They aren't the supreme court of the United States.”

No, you'll only listen to a judge you agree with.

[butterdezillion]

Exactly. Freepers can have 2,000-post threads debating it but in the end it’s not decided until we have a court ruling, since they are the ones authorized to interpret the Constitution.

This HAS to be dealt with.

I wasn’t aware that there are challenges to Rubio’s eligibility also. I said the dems haven’t threatened to sue if Rubio is the nominee but I just might not have heard about it. Have the dems said anything about that?

Two of the top 3 R candidates could conceivably be taken out by a judge - either ruling accurately or being bought off - if they are the R candidate, thereby shoeing in the dem candidate.

This HAS to be dealt with, because as long as judges can be bought (as the dems have a history of doing), it doesn’t even matter what the Constitution truly means. It only matters that if either of these guys is nominnated the dems will have an Achilles’ heel with which to disqualify the R candidate.

[Just mythoughts]

Oh those who buy into mass deception will need a scapegoat.

[fooman]

I think that is about right.

[Yosemitest]

I hope you're not inferring that I support the SOCIALIST Donald "EMINENT DOMAIN FOR PRIVATE USE" Trump.

CRUZ or LOSE!

"The Republican establishment has more experience electing Democrats than I do.
They've shown they know how to do it, in presidential races. "


What You Need To Know About Ted Cruz ( 1:46 )

Take a good long look at where "Establishment Republicans" ALWAYS take us.

CRUZ or LOSE!

[bushpilot2]

Ted Cruz said he requested US passport in high school. Any idea his proof US citizenship?

[diamond6]

I used to be on the fence with Trump, but I’m having more misgivings and suspicions about his legitimate conservativeness every day. I believe he’s going to slide back into being a liberal/moderate after the election is over.

Even with Rubio’s flaws, he’s a more legitimate conservative than Trump is.