Why Ted Cruz Will NOT Win A Contested Convention

[Militants]

But Cruz are last 35-40 year U.S. citizens.

 

[Toro]

Glad to see PixieStix back!

 

[Dot Com]

huh?

 

[Silhouette]

Its different. The Panama Canal Zone was an unorganized US territory. Which Longborough v. Blake makes clear is the United States. Cruz was born in Canada. Which most definitely wasn't the United States.

Regardless, the Senate won't want to fuck with a GOP candidate. And the courts don't want this issue at all. They would only touch it if a State Secretary of State brought it to them. And then likely find in Cruz's favor.

Says the far left advocate who strangely is here defending far-right Cruz's "right to run" for the GOP ticket.

"Don't worry folks! The USSC's liberal majority in the pocket of the far-left cult won't take every opportunity available to strip a GOP-Cruz at the last minute to harm the vote and pitch it over to Hillary!"...

You're so funny Skylar it's almost cute...

 

[Skylar]

Its different. The Panama Canal Zone was an unorganized US territory. Which Longborough v. Blake makes clear is the United States. Cruz was born in Canada. Which most definitely wasn't the United States.

Regardless, the Senate won't want to fuck with a GOP candidate. And the courts don't want this issue at all. They would only touch it if a State Secretary of State brought it to them. And then likely find in Cruz's favor.

Says the far left advocate who strangely is here defending far-right Cruz's "right to run" for the GOP ticket.

You confuse me with yourself. You make assessments based on what you want to occur rather than what the evidence suggests. I make assessments on what the evidence suggests, regardless of my preferred outcome.

My methodology works far better in predicting actual outcomes than yours does. For example, in every prediction of the law you've made, you've been wrong. Every single time, every single case, ever single legal outcome.

While I have a reasonably good record of predicting the actual outcome of legal cases. I'll stick with my methodology, thanks.

"Don't worry folks! The USSC's liberal majority in the pocket of the far-left cult won't take every opportunity available to strip a GOP-Cruz at the last minute to harm the vote and pitch it over to Hillary!"...

You're so funny Skylar it's almost cute...

Save of course that they most likely won't. The USSC has no interest in this case. They were offered yet another opportunity to step in. And again, predictably haven't granted cert. With virtually every case challenging Cruz's eligibility being dismissed.

You're again projecting your desires onto outcomes. Assuming that because you want something to happen, it will happen. Alas, that's not how reality works.

As your perfect record of failure in predicting legal outcomes demonstrates.

 

[Syriusly]

What's your point? Neither changes the fact that he is a natural born citizen. He was a citizen by virtue of his birth. No one disputes that. At no point was he naturalized nor did he ever need to be.

So this argument will get you no where. Not sure why you are so desperate to eliminate the only conservative still running but this wont work. The courts already ruled against it

Depends. If we're using an originalist interpretation of the constitution, then its fairly obvious that Cruz doesn't qualify.

If we're using a more contemporary intepretation, I'd say that the leap from 'citizen at birth' to 'natural born citizen' is a pretty short one. And Cruz would likely be found to be a natural born citizen.

Regardless, its moot. As the court doesn't want to hear any of these lawsuits.

I think with the Senate voting that McCain was eligible back in 2008, they are unlikely to decide that Cruz is not eligible now- despite how much they despise .him.

Unless of course some actual evidence comes out that he was not born a citizen.

Its different. The Panama Canal Zone was an unorganized US territory. Which Longborough v. Blake makes clear is the United States. Cruz was born in Canada. Which most definitely wasn't the United States.

Regardless, the Senate won't want to fuck with a GOP candidate. And the courts don't want this issue at all. They would only touch it if a State Secretary of State brought it to them. And then likely find in Cruz's favor.

Oh I think Trump would have standing, especially if he lost a contested convention- but I think the Federal court will throw it out and say that the courts do not have jurisdiction- Congress does.

 

[Syriusly]

Its different. The Panama Canal Zone was an unorganized US territory. Which Longborough v. Blake makes clear is the United States. Cruz was born in Canada. Which most definitely wasn't the United States.

Regardless, the Senate won't want to fuck with a GOP candidate. And the courts don't want this issue at all. They would only touch it if a State Secretary of State brought it to them. And then likely find in Cruz's favor.

"Don't worry folks! The USSC's liberal majority..

LOL.......poor Silhouette as delusional about the Supreme Court having a 'liberal majority' as she is about everything else.

 

[Flopper]

The requirement of a person running for President of the United States is that s/he be a natural born citizen. Rafael Edward "Ted" Cruz is a natural born citizen of Alberta, Canada.

And if you think a Cruz nomination will not be challenged at the 11th hour by the left and their pocket liberal-majority on the USSC, eager to see one of their own take the empty Seat there for life to get a lock on their liberal majority for the next generation, you need to have your head examined.

http://www.newsweek.com/ted-cruz-canadian-citizen-415430 A growing number of constitutional law scholars are arguing that Ted Cruz’s birth in Canada makes him ineligible to become U.S. president...An increasing number of high-profile constitutional law professors, including one of Cruz's own professors from Harvard Law School, have in recent days argued publicly that Cruz's birth disqualifies him.... English common law was "unequivocal" on the subject, McManamon says: "Natural-born subjects had to be born in English territory."

Ultimately the USSC *sudden Decision* probably late this Summer or in September will be that what matters is the INTENT of the original law. The intent of course is to insure that because of the potential for foreign influence, the Office of POTUS must be completely scrubbed of potential for contamination. Other things that will be pondered as to this intent is also the requirement that a person reside continually within the US for a number of years just prior to running, in addition to being natural born.

For you see, the 14th Amendment means that even though it's "nice little ole' Canada" today, "born to a mommy born in the US"...tomorrow it can also legally be a Russian boy born to a Russian mother by a US-born serviceman on shore leave. And you cannot discriminate based on gender or country of origin, don't forget.

So, for the GOP to nominate (or to continue the charade further) with Ted Cruz would be political suicide. It's true that one of the two remaining "not Trump" candidates should leave the race so the other can legitimately finish off Trump. So let it be the one who isn't eligible to run anyway...

I think your dreaming. The case would have to go through lower federal courts before the Supreme Court would considered hearing the case. I think the problem would be getting the lawsuit into federal court. The plaintiff would have be able to show how he would be personally harmed by a Cruz presidency.

The basic problem is no one has the responsibility of determining presidential eligibility.

I disagree. State Secretaries of State would have that responsibility. Essentially acting as gate keepers to that State's electorate.

It seems to me that since it's a national requirement in the US Constitution, the qualification should come at the national level, say the Federal Election Commission. If the decision was made at the state level it could easily become a political decision in which a presidential candidate is struck from the ballot in some states yet the vice president candidate would remain on the ballot.

The best solution is to eliminate "natural born" from the constitution and let the voters decide. Where you were born does not determine your loyalty, at least not today. If Cruz were born about a hundred miles further South in the US, that would not make him any better qualified..

Under the constitution you could be born in the US live most of your life in Russia as a permant resident and still meet the constitutional requirement for president.

The voters should make the decision.
.

 

[JimBowie1958]

The patriotic fed-up silent White majority will put Trump in and prevent the future browning of America. It's the only way to make America great again.

Lol, define what a 'white person' is, Sherlock. The way that word is used today it means English speaking caucasians from North Western Europe, a deliberately designed statistical minority.

What is it about speaking Spanish that makes someone no longer white?

What is it about dragging racial bullshit into EVERY SINGLE FUCKING DISCUSSION that tells you you got a winning angle on the topic?

Seriously, you sound like a provocateur Democrat posing as a white racist.

Either way you bring in unneeded factoids here when everyone has the same economic interests in fixing this thing, and it makes you nothing more than a loser.

 

[Skylar]

The requirement of a person running for President of the United States is that s/he be a natural born citizen. Rafael Edward "Ted" Cruz is a natural born citizen of Alberta, Canada.

And if you think a Cruz nomination will not be challenged at the 11th hour by the left and their pocket liberal-majority on the USSC, eager to see one of their own take the empty Seat there for life to get a lock on their liberal majority for the next generation, you need to have your head examined.

http://www.newsweek.com/ted-cruz-canadian-citizen-415430 A growing number of constitutional law scholars are arguing that Ted Cruz’s birth in Canada makes him ineligible to become U.S. president...An increasing number of high-profile constitutional law professors, including one of Cruz's own professors from Harvard Law School, have in recent days argued publicly that Cruz's birth disqualifies him.... English common law was "unequivocal" on the subject, McManamon says: "Natural-born subjects had to be born in English territory."

Ultimately the USSC *sudden Decision* probably late this Summer or in September will be that what matters is the INTENT of the original law. The intent of course is to insure that because of the potential for foreign influence, the Office of POTUS must be completely scrubbed of potential for contamination. Other things that will be pondered as to this intent is also the requirement that a person reside continually within the US for a number of years just prior to running, in addition to being natural born.

For you see, the 14th Amendment means that even though it's "nice little ole' Canada" today, "born to a mommy born in the US"...tomorrow it can also legally be a Russian boy born to a Russian mother by a US-born serviceman on shore leave. And you cannot discriminate based on gender or country of origin, don't forget.

So, for the GOP to nominate (or to continue the charade further) with Ted Cruz would be political suicide. It's true that one of the two remaining "not Trump" candidates should leave the race so the other can legitimately finish off Trump. So let it be the one who isn't eligible to run anyway...

I think your dreaming. The case would have to go through lower federal courts before the Supreme Court would considered hearing the case. I think the problem would be getting the lawsuit into federal court. The plaintiff would have be able to show how he would be personally harmed by a Cruz presidency.

The basic problem is no one has the responsibility of determining presidential eligibility.

I disagree. State Secretaries of State would have that responsibility. Essentially acting as gate keepers to that State's electorate.

It seems to me that since it's a national requirement in the US Constitution, the qualification should come at the national level, say the Federal Election Commission. If the decision was made at the state level it could easily become a political decision in which a presidential candidate is struck from the ballot in some states yet the vice president candidate would remain on the ballot.

The Secretary of State could, at the very least, force a court battle on the topic. And given the fact that the process of election as the method of assigning electors is entirely at the discretion of the state legislatures....and the Secretary of State is acting on their behalf, he'd almost certainly have standing.

The best solution is to eliminate "natural born" from the constitution and let the voters decide. Where you were born does not determine your loyalty, at least not today. If Cruz were born about a hundred miles further South in the US, that would not make him any better qualified..

Best perhaps, hypothetically. But in terms of practical solutions, its a little ivory tower. There's 0.0% chance that such a solution would be implemented to resolve Cruz's eligibility if it were seriously challenged. A court ruling, congressional ruling, or the decision of individual state Secretaries of State would be the arbiters for all practical purposes.

 

[oreo]

More desperate wind pissing. Cruz is eligible to be President. Get over it. Or don't. Either way, you're irrelevant.[/

The opt is correct, Ted Cruz is certain to be challenged on his eligibility should he become the nominee, Democrats have already stated that.

It's the hypocrisy of it all. For 4 long years Obama was hounded by right wingers about Obama's Birth certificate. Obama finally produces one showing him born on U.S. Soil. What did they do next? Supported a candidate that was actually born in Canada. The ineptitude of such a large group of people, who actually believed that this wouldn't come back and bite hard is astounding.

So if Republicans are going to do a contested convention it would probably be wise to find another sacrificial lamb, otherwise it's going to be all about Cruz's eligibility all the way up to election night.

 

[Boss]

Cruz will not be declared ineligible. His mother is an American citizen, therefore, he is also an American citizen. The very term "natural born" is derived from old English law which deemed those born by subjects of the crown as "natural born" under the crown, regardless of their place of birth. That is where the term itself originates.

Furthermore, the founding father most influential in articulating the concerns of foreign influence in government, the bedrock and foundation of the "natural born" clause in the Constitution, was John Jay. Jay served many years as Minister of Spain where he and his wife had several of six children born on foreign soil. So we have to suspend disbelief to think that John Jay would advocate for something that would prohibit several of his children from running for president while allowing the ones born on American soil to run. Clearly, that was not his concern or intent with regard to foreign influence. Surely, John Jay did not think some of his own children were disqualified from running for president just because they were born on Spanish soil.

Not only is there no foundation for this argument in the Constitution or Federalist Papers, there is yet another snafu. We went through this just 8 years ago when Barack Obama became a Democrat candidate for President. Some people don't realize, you don't just up and decide you're going to run for president on one of the two major party tickets, you have to be approved by the head of the party itself in order to put your name in the hat and run as a Republican or Democrat. Obama's candidacy was vetted and approved by Nancy Pelosi. To this day, we still have never seen the Certificate of Live Birth long form from Obama, we only have the word of Pelosi that he is duly qualified to hold the office.

Now, this is more important than you may think. You see, when a candidate is allowed to run and people go out and cast votes for them in good faith, you cannot just snatch their votes away and disenfranchise them because you don't think their candidate is qualified AFTER the process. The people who have voted for Cruz are irreparably harmed by such an act through no fault of their own. The time for an objection to his candidacy to be raised has come and gone.

Finally, should there be, by some quirk of fate, a case brought and appealed to SCOTUS on the matter, they have a long-standing doctrine regarding "political questions" which they have never ignored in the history of the court. To put this simply, the court is never going to involve itself in a case brought through the heat of politics. This would clearly be an example of such a case, brought solely on the basis of political bias. SCOTUS will simply not hear the case and the Cruz candidacy will stand.

 

[Flopper]

The requirement of a person running for President of the United States is that s/he be a natural born citizen. Rafael Edward "Ted" Cruz is a natural born citizen of Alberta, Canada.

And if you think a Cruz nomination will not be challenged at the 11th hour by the left and their pocket liberal-majority on the USSC, eager to see one of their own take the empty Seat there for life to get a lock on their liberal majority for the next generation, you need to have your head examined.

http://www.newsweek.com/ted-cruz-canadian-citizen-415430 A growing number of constitutional law scholars are arguing that Ted Cruz’s birth in Canada makes him ineligible to become U.S. president...An increasing number of high-profile constitutional law professors, including one of Cruz's own professors from Harvard Law School, have in recent days argued publicly that Cruz's birth disqualifies him.... English common law was "unequivocal" on the subject, McManamon says: "Natural-born subjects had to be born in English territory."

Ultimately the USSC *sudden Decision* probably late this Summer or in September will be that what matters is the INTENT of the original law. The intent of course is to insure that because of the potential for foreign influence, the Office of POTUS must be completely scrubbed of potential for contamination. Other things that will be pondered as to this intent is also the requirement that a person reside continually within the US for a number of years just prior to running, in addition to being natural born.

For you see, the 14th Amendment means that even though it's "nice little ole' Canada" today, "born to a mommy born in the US"...tomorrow it can also legally be a Russian boy born to a Russian mother by a US-born serviceman on shore leave. And you cannot discriminate based on gender or country of origin, don't forget.

So, for the GOP to nominate (or to continue the charade further) with Ted Cruz would be political suicide. It's true that one of the two remaining "not Trump" candidates should leave the race so the other can legitimately finish off Trump. So let it be the one who isn't eligible to run anyway...

I think your dreaming. The case would have to go through lower federal courts before the Supreme Court would considered hearing the case. I think the problem would be getting the lawsuit into federal court. The plaintiff would have be able to show how he would be personally harmed by a Cruz presidency.

The basic problem is no one has the responsibility of determining presidential eligibility.

I disagree. State Secretaries of State would have that responsibility. Essentially acting as gate keepers to that State's electorate.

It seems to me that since it's a national requirement in the US Constitution, the qualification should come at the national level, say the Federal Election Commission. If the decision was made at the state level it could easily become a political decision in which a presidential candidate is struck from the ballot in some states yet the vice president candidate would remain on the ballot.

The Secretary of State could, at the very least, force a court battle on the topic. And given the fact that the process of election as the method of assigning electors is entirely at the discretion of the state legislatures....and the Secretary of State is acting on their behalf, he'd almost certainly have standing.

The best solution is to eliminate "natural born" from the constitution and let the voters decide. Where you were born does not determine your loyalty, at least not today. If Cruz were born about a hundred miles further South in the US, that would not make him any better qualified..

Best perhaps, hypothetically. But in terms of practical solutions, its a little ivory tower. There's 0.0% chance that such a solution would be implemented to resolve Cruz's eligibility if it were seriously challenged. A court ruling, congressional ruling, or the decision of individual state Secretaries of State would be the arbiters for all practical purposes.

Yes, I think the states do have the power but I doubt they would choose to exercise that power. The Secretary of State could just have the candidate certify that he or she meets the constitutional requirements. Some states may already do this.

 

[Skylar]

The requirement of a person running for President of the United States is that s/he be a natural born citizen. Rafael Edward "Ted" Cruz is a natural born citizen of Alberta, Canada.

And if you think a Cruz nomination will not be challenged at the 11th hour by the left and their pocket liberal-majority on the USSC, eager to see one of their own take the empty Seat there for life to get a lock on their liberal majority for the next generation, you need to have your head examined.

Ultimately the USSC *sudden Decision* probably late this Summer or in September will be that what matters is the INTENT of the original law. The intent of course is to insure that because of the potential for foreign influence, the Office of POTUS must be completely scrubbed of potential for contamination. Other things that will be pondered as to this intent is also the requirement that a person reside continually within the US for a number of years just prior to running, in addition to being natural born.

For you see, the 14th Amendment means that even though it's "nice little ole' Canada" today, "born to a mommy born in the US"...tomorrow it can also legally be a Russian boy born to a Russian mother by a US-born serviceman on shore leave. And you cannot discriminate based on gender or country of origin, don't forget.

So, for the GOP to nominate (or to continue the charade further) with Ted Cruz would be political suicide. It's true that one of the two remaining "not Trump" candidates should leave the race so the other can legitimately finish off Trump. So let it be the one who isn't eligible to run anyway...

I think your dreaming. The case would have to go through lower federal courts before the Supreme Court would considered hearing the case. I think the problem would be getting the lawsuit into federal court. The plaintiff would have be able to show how he would be personally harmed by a Cruz presidency.

The basic problem is no one has the responsibility of determining presidential eligibility.

I disagree. State Secretaries of State would have that responsibility. Essentially acting as gate keepers to that State's electorate.

It seems to me that since it's a national requirement in the US Constitution, the qualification should come at the national level, say the Federal Election Commission. If the decision was made at the state level it could easily become a political decision in which a presidential candidate is struck from the ballot in some states yet the vice president candidate would remain on the ballot.

The Secretary of State could, at the very least, force a court battle on the topic. And given the fact that the process of election as the method of assigning electors is entirely at the discretion of the state legislatures....and the Secretary of State is acting on their behalf, he'd almost certainly have standing.

The best solution is to eliminate "natural born" from the constitution and let the voters decide. Where you were born does not determine your loyalty, at least not today. If Cruz were born about a hundred miles further South in the US, that would not make him any better qualified..

Best perhaps, hypothetically. But in terms of practical solutions, its a little ivory tower. There's 0.0% chance that such a solution would be implemented to resolve Cruz's eligibility if it were seriously challenged. A court ruling, congressional ruling, or the decision of individual state Secretaries of State would be the arbiters for all practical purposes.

Yes, I think the states do have the power but I doubt they would choose to exercise that power. The Secretary of State could just have the candidate certify that he or she meets the constitutional requirements. Some states may already do this.

Oh, no one is doing shit. Not the Secretaries of State, not the Congress, not the Courts. This issue is essentially inert. Sil is smoking dreams.

 

[Skylar]

Cruz will not be declared ineligible. His mother is an American citizen, therefore, he is also an American citizen. The very term "natural born" is derived from old English law which deemed those born by subjects of the crown as "natural born" under the crown, regardless of their place of birth. That is where the term itself originates.

Quite the opposite, actually. The term 'natural born' is explicitly related to place of birth as understood by the founders. As the courts went into detail about in the Wong Kim Ark decision:

The fundamental principle of the common law with regard to English nationality was birth within the allegiance, also called "ligealty," "obedience," "faith," or "power" of the King. The principle embraced all persons born within the King's allegiance and subject to his protection. Such allegiance and protection were mutual -- as expressed in the maxim protectio trahit subjectionem, et subjectio protectionem -- and were not restricted to natural-born subjects and naturalized subjects, or to those who had taken an oath of allegiance, but were predicable of aliens in amity so long as they were within the kingdom. Children, born in England, of such aliens were therefore natural-born subjects.

Place of birth defined natural born citizenship. Even if both parents are aliens. Place of birth was the primary focus of citizenship in the US. Says who? Same James Madison, the Father of the Constitution:

"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, 1789

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 2: James Madison, House of Representatives

I'm not exactly sure where you got your idea on natural born citizenship. But it wasn't the founders or English Common law.

Furthermore, the founding father most influential in articulating the concerns of foreign influence in government, the bedrock and foundation of the "natural born" clause in the Constitution, was John Jay. Jay served many years as Minister of Spain where he and his wife had several of six children born on foreign soil. So we have to suspend disbelief to think that John Jay would advocate for something that would prohibit several of his children from running for president while allowing the ones born on American soil to run. Clearly, that was not his concern or intent with regard to foreign influence. Surely, John Jay did not think some of his own children were disqualified from running for president just because they were born on Spanish soil.

The Naturalization Act of 1790 extended natural born citizenship to children born abroad to US citizens. Making it ridiculously clear that BEFORE the passage of the 1790 Nturalization Act....that they weren't natural born citizens. Else why would such status need to be extended to them.

And all of Jay's children were already citizens at the time of the ratification of the Constitution. Meaning that regardless of their natural born status, all of them would have been eligible to be president thanks to the grandfather clause.

You simply don't know what you're talking about, Boss.

 

[Flopper]

I think your dreaming. The case would have to go through lower federal courts before the Supreme Court would considered hearing the case. I think the problem would be getting the lawsuit into federal court. The plaintiff would have be able to show how he would be personally harmed by a Cruz presidency.

The basic problem is no one has the responsibility of determining presidential eligibility.

I disagree. State Secretaries of State would have that responsibility. Essentially acting as gate keepers to that State's electorate.

It seems to me that since it's a national requirement in the US Constitution, the qualification should come at the national level, say the Federal Election Commission. If the decision was made at the state level it could easily become a political decision in which a presidential candidate is struck from the ballot in some states yet the vice president candidate would remain on the ballot.

The Secretary of State could, at the very least, force a court battle on the topic. And given the fact that the process of election as the method of assigning electors is entirely at the discretion of the state legislatures....and the Secretary of State is acting on their behalf, he'd almost certainly have standing.

The best solution is to eliminate "natural born" from the constitution and let the voters decide. Where you were born does not determine your loyalty, at least not today. If Cruz were born about a hundred miles further South in the US, that would not make him any better qualified..

Best perhaps, hypothetically. But in terms of practical solutions, its a little ivory tower. There's 0.0% chance that such a solution would be implemented to resolve Cruz's eligibility if it were seriously challenged. A court ruling, congressional ruling, or the decision of individual state Secretaries of State would be the arbiters for all practical purposes.

Yes, I think the states do have the power but I doubt they would choose to exercise that power. The Secretary of State could just have the candidate certify that he or she meets the constitutional requirements. Some states may already do this.

Oh, no one is doing shit. Not the Secretaries of State, not the Congress, not the Courts. This issue is essentially inert. Sil is smoking dreams.

Since the constitution laid down the requirement and neither it nor congress addressed enforcement either the states or federal government could act. Since the term "natural citizen" is not well defined, a liberal interpretation of the phrase is likely.

 

[Avatar4321]

A natural born citizen is easy to define. It's someone who is a citizen by virtue of their birth. The only other way to be a citizen is to be naturalized as a citizen.

Is Ted cruz a citizen by virtue of his birth? Yes. End of discussion

 

[Syriusly]

. To this day, we still have never seen the Certificate of Live Birth long form from Obama, we only have the word of Pelosi that he is duly qualified to hold the office..

Hmmmm you may not have seen President Obama's Birth Certificate but the Americans that matter have- not that there is any requirement that a candidate show anyone his birth certificate.

The State of Hawaii has repeatedly, officially, and consistently confirmed that President Obama was born in Hawaii.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Cruz won't win a contested convention cuz their won't be one. Trump will reach the required delegates (1237) and then some in June. You can take that to the bank unless he fucks everything up and self destructs. Otherwise count on Trump reaching the magic number in June 2016.

Screen shot it and post in on your wall

Unless Trump Self destructs? Really? He has already run the most atypical campaign in modern history, he has said and done so many things wrong there are too many to list. Just how does he self destruct?

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Cruz will not be declared ineligible. His mother is an American citizen, therefore, he is also an American citizen. The very term "natural born" is derived from old English law which deemed those born by subjects of the crown as "natural born" under the crown, regardless of their place of birth. That is where the term itself originates.

Furthermore, the founding father most influential in articulating the concerns of foreign influence in government, the bedrock and foundation of the "natural born" clause in the Constitution, was John Jay. Jay served many years as Minister of Spain where he and his wife had several of six children born on foreign soil. So we have to suspend disbelief to think that John Jay would advocate for something that would prohibit several of his children from running for president while allowing the ones born on American soil to run. Clearly, that was not his concern or intent with regard to foreign influence. Surely, John Jay did not think some of his own children were disqualified from running for president just because they were born on Spanish soil.

Not only is there no foundation for this argument in the Constitution or Federalist Papers, there is yet another snafu. We went through this just 8 years ago when Barack Obama became a Democrat candidate for President. Some people don't realize, you don't just up and decide you're going to run for president on one of the two major party tickets, you have to be approved by the head of the party itself in order to put your name in the hat and run as a Republican or Democrat. Obama's candidacy was vetted and approved by Nancy Pelosi. To this day, we still have never seen the Certificate of Live Birth long form from Obama, we only have the word of Pelosi that he is duly qualified to hold the office.

Now, this is more important than you may think. You see, when a candidate is allowed to run and people go out and cast votes for them in good faith, you cannot just snatch their votes away and disenfranchise them because you don't think their candidate is qualified AFTER the process. The people who have voted for Cruz are irreparably harmed by such an act through no fault of their own. The time for an objection to his candidacy to be raised has come and gone.

Finally, should there be, by some quirk of fate, a case brought and appealed to SCOTUS on the matter, they have a long-standing doctrine regarding "political questions" which they have never ignored in the history of the court. To put this simply, the court is never going to involve itself in a case brought through the heat of politics. This would clearly be an example of such a case, brought solely on the basis of political bias. SCOTUS will simply not hear the case and the Cruz candidacy will stand.

All of the historical information may be accurate (btw very informative, thank you) but will it damage him too much in the election if nominated?