Ted Cruz Not Eligible To Be POTUS, According to Most Plausible Interpretation of Constitution

Hot Air ^ | 2/10/16

[SubMareener]

2nd Division Vet is a Cruz bundler, and NWO insider. He knows what is going on. Just doesn’t like that the rest of us are catching on to how we have been played.

[Yashcheritsiy]

“It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other.” - James Madison, May 22, 1789

[AmericanVictory]

I don’t find Professor Posner’s reasoning sound. To be vying for election but to not be able to be President if elected seems like a tangible harm that is not speculative. To go to all the expense and effort of becoming the President only then to not be able to be President is not in the least less than a real prospect of substantial harm. Judge Posner is highly regarded but his son’s reasoning in this brief article seems quite flawed.

[jospehm20]

The only Canadian too.

[bushpilot2]

Pls explain why Ted Cruz type citizenship would fall under immigration and naturalization laws?

[JayGalt]

Nice quote, “The Papers of James Madison”, which you have thus introduced me to, will provide interesting reading!

[xzins]

If this were 1790 there’d be no doubt about it.

The law changed and the interpretation of the Constitution has never been made by the Supreme Court.

Not that I consider Scotus to be an honest broker on this.

[RginTN]

Try reading the entire sentence but that would mean paying attention to all the words instead of three. Oh well have fun

[Cboldt]

Amar and Balkin also argued both sides of the "standing/justiciability" side of the equation. One on each side.

In the recent IL and NH ballot challenges, the elections commissions were split on that point. IL said it had the power to rule on the merits, NH said it was not competent to rule on the merits. The IL ruling was "summary," did not discuss the objectors argument at all. Just picked one side, and said that's it. Totally flawed procedure by the election commission.

I come down on the side that election commissions and secretaries of state are comptent to rule on the question, in order to protect the integrity of the primary ballot. If the parties don't like that, they can quit conducting primaries. First presidential primary in the US was 1921 or so, IIRC.

[inpajamas]

Cruz eligible? - Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn. This is a revolution as far as I am concerned. You don't have a Constitution anymore so why let the establishment who is holding it hostage use it to stop you from reinstating it. You think you still have a Constitution? Your president defies it, your judges defy and redefine it, government bureaucrats have been given power to bypass it, in practice it does not exist. Given the option, I would take a foreign Constitutionalist in the mold of the Founders over almost everyone one of the candidates running on either side if given the option. We are at the point we are done as a nation unless somehow we start over -- not try to fix it, unless we basically start over with what we were given in the beginning we are finished. A pragmatist will not save you. At this point only principles and values offer any hope. I don't care where the values and principles and morals come from if they are good; and I don't care who has them. I will stick with invisible virtues wherever they be found. If they are not embraced by Americans in power, I will support a foreigner who has them. Maybe we (the states) need to call for a convention and suspend the the Feds power and their interpretation of Constitution to save the Constitution from them. In effect, the document is all but dead anyway so why should we let evil men use it keep us in bondage? Think hard about this: "The question you propose, whether circumstances do not sometimes occur, which make it a duty in officers of high trust, to assume authorities beyond the law, is easy of solution in principle, but sometimes embarrassing in practice. A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self -preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means.. . . " - Thomas Jefferson to John B. Colvin, 20 Sept. 1810 Works 11:146 yeah, so frankly my dear. . .

[svcw]

Hummm, I seem to remember that as well.

[svcw]

Well, in Illinois they did.
It was a court decision by the way but it’s OK.

[svcw]

Oh, and more than one court

[Enlightened1]

Sorry you are wrong.

Soil matters, being in the U.S. military matters, diplomat mattes and both parents being U.S. citizens matter.

Just having 1 U.S. mom and being born in a foreign land does not qualify.

I know you know that, and do not understand why you pretend it's not true. Just because you wish it was the case does not mean it is the case.

For the record, the DNC along with GOPe will shop a federal judge to disqualify Cruz if he is leading.

Anyhow, I don't think it will happen. After the dirty tricks in Iowa, and future Primary will probably not be good for Cruz. No one likes a cheater.

[dforest]

Cruz is not eligible and he knows it!

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

Trump is considering Ted for VP, so Cruz must be eligible now.

[bushpilot2]

The federal government said SCOTUS in Minor v Happersett defined a natural born citizen.

[bray]

You better be wearing your asbestos underwear.
Saint Cruz will not be mocked.

Seems that natural born citizen should be born inside the borders and not an immigrant, but what do I know.

Pray America wakes

[iowamark]

Eric Posner is a radical Chicago leftist. He doesn’t really believe this nonsense. He is just being a wise guy, mocking the Constitution.

[Badboo]

It is highly unlikely Cruz will be nominated. If nominated, his eligibility will be vociferously challenged. If he survives that he doesn’t stand a chance of stitching together a winnable electoral coalition. Thus a vote for Cruz is a vote for socialism with Sanders elected.

For all the Cruzettes who feel this isn’t fair, I am sorry but we’ve cancelled participation trophies this year.