Silhouette
Gold Member
- Jul 15, 2013
- 25,815
- 1,938
- 265
I get it. The Liberal staff here don't want the GOP catching on that Cruz is not eligible to run. They don't want the RNC to ponder how the liberal-dominated SCOTUS majority will hear this case if Cruz is nominated.
There are legal scholars chomping at the bit for the first indication that Cruz is the GOP nominee. Upon that instant, they will press SCOTUS to decide on behalf of all 50 states (the only court where the jurisdiction is legitimate) whether or not Ted Cruz can run for POTUS having an Alberta Canada birth certificate and only having renounced in May, 2014.
Arguments are that since his mommy was born in the US, he was automatically a US citizen. Well his daddy was born in Cuba, so does that mean he also automatically is a Cuban citizen too? If a US man, a soldier on shore leave sires a child with a Russian woman and she raises it for its formative years in Russia, is that child also eligible for POTUS?
The intent of the founding fathers was for "natural born" to minimize the influences of any foreign government on the one Office in the country with the most singular unilateral power granted any man. Therefore, it and just it, has been isolated for the "natural born" requirement. The intent is everything. People who argue that the Constitution and its interpretations are progressive can't touch this argument. Since national security is at stake, there is no modification allowed of the very narrow terms and intent behind "natural born".
Having an Alberta, Canada birth certificate and only renouncing one's citizenship over 40 years later means you do not qualify for the narrow parameters of "natural born".