NH voters cast vote for ineligible candidate Cruz?, New Hampshire ballot commission rejected efforts to remove Ted Cruz, Law of eligibility murky, Neither US Supreme Court nor any authority has explicitly ruled on natural born citizen
“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.”…Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law Professor
“Ted Cruz wrote the forward for U.S. Constitution for Dummies which clearly reveals that he is not a natural born citizen.”…IL ballot challenger Bill Graham
“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND
Two state ballot entities recently ruled on Ted Cruz remaining on their ballots.
The Illinois state board of elections ruled that Ted Cruz is eligible as a natural born citizen. IL is consistently listed as one of the most corrupt states in the US and the home of Obama, another non natural born citizen.
The New Hampshire ballot commission took a more honest approach.
“If there is a clear ruling on some issues that somebody clearly doesn’t meet, we would apply it. If there is a constitutional uncertainty about the meaning of something – which from my research and from all the stuff that was thrown at us at the commission there certainly is about the natural born citizen thing — we don’t undertake to make that decision,”
I was disappointed to find what I consider to be the most inaccurate article I have uncovered at American Thinker, February 5, 2016.
“Illinois and New Hampshire Agree Cruz is a Natural Born Citizen”
“Trump persists that Cruz’s citizenship is still an open question. It is not, and the election boards of two states, New Hampshire and Illinois, have now ruled, in response to complaints, that Sen. Ted Cruz is indeed, under the laws and Constitution of the United States, a “natural born citizen” fully eligible to be President of the United States. As the Washington Examiner reported:”
“A ballot commission in New Hampshire also ruled in favor of Cruz in January, but the language in Monday’s decision by the Illinois board took a stronger tone than the previous ruling, warning other skeptics, “Further discussion on this issue is unnecessary.””
“Indeed, it is unnecessary. The question of Cruz’s citizenship has been asked and answered. Is Trump saying that a baby born in Paris to a vacationing American family is not eligible to run for president and must be “naturalized” like some illegal alien from Guadalajara?
Some noted legal scholars would beg to differ from Trump’s concern that Cruz is not in fact a “natural born” citizen.
Jonathan Adler, who teaches courses in constitutional, administrative, and environmental law at Case Western University School of Law, writes in the Washington Post:
Ted Cruz was born in Canada. His mother was a U.S. citizen. His father, a Cuban, was not. Under U.S. law, the fact that Cruz was born to a U.S. citizen mother makes him a citizen from birth. In other words, he is a “natural born citizen” (as opposed to a naturalized citizen) and is constitutionally eligible.”
“Also agreeing with Cruz’s eligibility are two constitutional scholars who have argued cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. As the Washington Post reported:
Writing in the Harvard Law Review, two former top Supreme Court litigators, Neal Katyal and Paul Clement, said: “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.”
“Now two state boards of election have certified Cruz’s eligibility, which is beyond dispute, no matter how much Trump whines, pouts, and throws out groundless accusations.”
Aside from being wrong on the definition of natural born citizen, this article is blatantly inaccurate:
New Hampshire did not rule that Cruz is a natural born citizen.
It omitted the opinion of constitutional expert Laurence Tribe of Harvard:
“Cruz says this is all settled law, but Harvard’s Laurence Tribe disagrees.
“It clearly is not settled law,” Tribe said in recent an interview.”
“That’s because Tribe says Cruz is a constitutional “originalist,” who believes the document should be followed to the letter. Tribe says jurists who share such a view might well conclude that Cruz is not eligible to be president — because he was not born in America.
According to Tribe, this shows that Cruz is trying to have it both ways.”
From The Dallas Morning News November 24, 2015.
“The New Hampshire ballot commission today rejected efforts to kick Canada-born Sen. Ted Cruz off the primary ballot based on his birth outside the United States.
That clears a key legal and political obstacle as the Texas Republican seeks the GOP nomination for president. But it’s not a clear win on the question of eligibility.
Rather, the panel found that with the law of eligibility so murky, it can’t second-guess the senator’s own claims that he passes constitutional muster. Neither the U.S. Supreme Court nor any other authority has explicitly ruled that someone like Cruz — born on foreign soil, with one American parent – can or cannot be president.
“It would be really nice if somebody would get this issue of law decided who has authority to decide constitutional issues, so every four years we don’t have this come up again,” said Manchester attorney Brad Cook, a Republican who chairs the 5-member New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission.”
AMERICAN THINKER OWES THE PUBLIC AN APOLOGY.