Posted on 02/18/2016 5:51:48 AM PST by GregNH
GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz should recuse himself in any future Senate Judiciary Committee vote on a nominee to replace Antonin Scalia, according to a law professor’s op-ed.
Cruz has a conflict of interest because of questions surrounding his eligibility to serve as president, according to the CNN op-ed by Northwestern University law professor Steven Lubet. Cruz is the only remaining GOP presidential contender with a seat on the committee.
(Excerpt) Read more at abajournal.com ...
Lefty CNN op-ed by lefty Northwestern University law professor Steven Lubet.
In addition to getting his stuff printed by CNN, Lubet writes for the lefty rag Slate.
My point was exactly that. He has already met the requirements of being a US Senator and IIRC it requires at least 35 years of age and a US citizen. That’s all.
Veeeeery Interesting!
Well, no, because there's no litigation on this at present. Just a lot of talk, which is notoriously cheap.
Not sure if you re being sarcastic or not, but I didn't see this coming, for real!
That is flat out BS. He was qualified to be a US senator therefore he can vote, period end of story (Weiss, you liberal POS).
Conflict of interest? He’s a Senator. the tin foil is extremely thick with this one.
Go sign a petition begging Donald Trump to sue Ted Cruz on eligibility. I guarantee that if he sues you trumpettes won’t like the outcome.
That’s why he is NOT suing and just making retarded noises.
For Senator, the age is 30 years, and US residence is 9 years. as you note, the other requirement is to be a citizen.
and I do not want Texas disenfranchised from any vote on a SC Justis.
Okay. I guess the 35 was for President. The main thing is that it does not require NBC.
I am aware of that.
That there might come an action in the future concerning Cruz' NBC status is not reason to abstain from voting on a potential SCOTUS appointee.
His duty to vote on the appointee, something which would be clear, definite, and present would overshadow the alleged conflict of interest from an action which might never occur.
I just see this as one more attempt to have one less NAY vote, and an attempt to lend credence to the NBC issue in the absence of a ruling or action, in order to use such a recusal against Cruz.
Cruz knows that he is not nor will ever be a ‘natural born’ US citizen... He is playing fast and loose with the Constitution.
Notice how he use to be referred to the man that followed ‘original intent’ of the Constitution... well that claim to fame got dropped, and now he is referred to as the ‘consistent conservative’...
At 42 years old in 2012, Ted Cruz obviously met the age requirement of 30 years. However, he also needed to meet the requirement of at least “nine Years a Citizen of the United States.†As the Constitution states, one cannot be just an “Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.â€
“The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are foreigners, who are permitted to settle and stay in the country. Bound to the society by their residence, they are subject to the laws of the state while they reside in it; and they are obliged to defend it, because it grants them protection, though they do not participate in all the rights of citizens. They enjoy only the advantages which the law or custom gives them. The perpetual inhabitants are those who have received the right of perpetual residence. These are a kind of citizens of an inferior order, and are united to the society without participating in all its advantages. Their children follow the condition of their fathers; and, as the state has given to these the right of perpetual residence, their right passes to their posterity.â€
The above Canadian document is proof of Canadian Citizenship at birth for Senator Ted Cruz. The next piece of authenticated evidence released by Ted Cruz is a Canadian document proving that he remained a legal citizen of Canada until renouncing that citizenship in May of 2014, which means, he was still a legal citizen of Canada in 2012 when he ran for, was elected and took the oath of office for the US Senate.
Ted’s parents were at no time serving in the U.S. Armed Forces, employed by the U.S. Government or by any of the certain international organizations, during their eight years in Canada, between 1966 and 1974. Further, Ted’s father Rafael, was at no time a legal citizen of the United States prior to naturalizing in 2005, from Canada. Rafael’s known legal citizenship status as of 1970 was Cuban, not American.
A law prof that just wants to get a cheap shot national headline so that he can try to get laid some of by his prettier airhead liberal students (female or otherwise). And legal basis for a politically motivated frivolous lawsuit IMHO. Yawn.
My Op-Ed says their opinion is worthless and not worthy of consideration.
I’m going to be on my two Senators with a vengeance about it - NO vote for ANY Obama nominee. But as a stopgap, I expect Ted to filibuster his ass off as a safeguard. :0)
That is not the professor’s point. Read the article! He is not even posing an opinion on whether Cruz is NBC. His point is eventually it WILL come before SCOTUS after appeals and Cruz would THEN be in conflict of interest.
Zzzzzzz
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.