politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles
Title: Donald Trump: Ted Cruz's citizenship could 'be a big problem'
Source:
USA Today
URL Source: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/ ... z-canada-citizenship/78325076/
Published: Jan 5, 2016
Author: David Jackson
Post Date: 2016-01-05 20:32:38 by Hondo68
Keywords: None
Views: 10974
Comments: 47
Donald Trump and Ted Cruz during a recent debate in Las Vegas. (Photo: AP) Birther-ism, Part II? Donald Trump, who famously questioned whether President Obama was really born in Hawaii, is now raising questions about the Canadian birth of Republican presidential campaign rival Ted Cruz. “Republicans are going to have to ask themselves the question: ‘Do we want a candidate who could be tied up in court for two years?’" Trump told The Washington Post in reference to the Texas senator. "That’d be a big problem ... It’d be a very precarious one for Republicans because he’d be running and the courts may take a long time to make a decision. You don’t want to be running and have that kind of thing over your head.” While born in Canada, Cruz and allies have said he is eligible for the presidency because his mother's status as an American citizen made him a citizen upon his birth. His father was born in Cuba. Since his election to the U.S. Senate from Texas in 2012, Cruz has released his birth certificate and renounced his Canadian citizenship. Still, some critics of Cruz have suggested taking the issue to court. “I’d hate to see something like that get in his way," Trump told the Post. "But a lot of people are talking about it and I know that even some states are looking at it very strongly, the fact that he was born in Canada and he has had a double passport.” Trump made the comments as Cruz has passed him in polls in Iowa, which opens the GOP nomination process with caucuses on Feb. 1. Cruz responded to Trump's jibe with a tweet showing a famous scene from the 1970s sitcom Happy Days, one in which the character Fonzie jumps over a school of sharks on water skis — inspiring the term "jump the shark," used to describe the moment at which a television show begins to lose its quality. My response to @realDonaldTrump calling into question my natural-born citizenship? https://t.co/gWfAHznlCY— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) January 5, 2016 Poster Comment: 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 24.
#13. To: hondo68 (#0)
Correct. He was a U.S. citizen at birth because his mother was a U.S. citizen. But not a natural born citizen (IMO) which is the issue. If the sta the status the status of the mother is the determining factor, then why all the hoopla about where Obama was born? Are we now saying the place of birth makes no difference as long as the mother is a U.S. citizen? First time I've heard that argument. I don't have the answer. No one does. The Supreme Court has not defined a natural born citizen. Meaning Trump is 100% correct -- this could be a potential stumbling block.
The legal definition of natural-born is enacted by Congress. They've changed it a number of times, including early in the Republic when the Founders were still around and serving in Congress and as prez. There was a major change in natural-born status that occured a few years after McStain was born. It wasn't clear if it was retroactive which is why the Stain asked for a Senate resolution to confirm his own status back in 2007. The idea that the Court is the sole arbiter of NB status is ridiculous. As was Vicomte's earlier nonsensical post about it. But then, the Birthers are led by the mail-order legal scholar (and dentist and real estate agent), Oily Teatz, so you can't expect much.
The idea that Congress can simply define terms in the Constitution without being subject to judicial review is what is ridiculous. You don't want to fight out the birther issues? I do. I think Obama was ineligible because he wasn't BORN American. He was, rather, naturalized retroactively, by act-of-law, when the law was changed, after his birth, to say that children born in his circumstance were born American. Cruz was born after the law change, so I think he IS a natural-born citizen. But that is not certain, and cannot be certain, unless the Supreme Court rules on it. The Court, the Republicans, the Democrats, and people like you, have shucked and jived on this issue since Obama turned up. I want it resolved definitively and absolutely, by a Supreme Court precedent. It's a constitutional matter relating directly to the most powerful office in the world, and it simply will not do to leave it dangling. You're fine with leaving it dangling, and then having to have this wrangling. I'm not. And no, in our system, a law passed by Congress NEVER finally answers the question. Neither does an Executive order. Only the Supreme Court is FINAL. That's why it will take a Supreme Court decision to SETTLE the issue. Congress doing this or that, ad hoc, does not settle the issue. The Supreme Court needs to acknowledge that Congress has acted within its power, and then answer the direct issue of eligibility. We need a precedent that cannot be gainsayed, and we don't currently have one. Your calling me an idiot and a mail-order legal scholar is hyperventilating. I am a very good student of the law who has made a living in it for a long time. I speak with licensed authority that you don't have when I say that this issue is UNSETTLED. It is NOT settled, no matter how much you assert, and reassert that it is, and no matter how much ridicule you pour on it. This is why I like Trump so much. He speaks to things like this, and overturns the applecarts of people like you, who want to simply shout down issues as opposed to NAILING them down with iron precedent. The office of President is too powerful to leave any wiggle room. This needs to be NAILED DOWN, to remove these doubts, and to foreclose candidacies that should not be launched. It's important. It was important, but we punted (aided by you). You want to punt again. Trump isn't going to let the issue go away. The Republicans SHOULD have fought to the death over the matter when it was Obama. But they didn't. So the issue lingers. And therefore Trump can pull the pin on this grenade AGAIN, and potentially blow out Cruz AND Rubio with it by unleashing a civil war on the right between mockers like you, and people like me who are never going to go away on the issue, or back down, until we have a legal opinion from the final authority - the Supreme Court - which sets what the law is. Birthers like me are not all mail-order legal scholars. Many of us are actual legal scholars. And when I say there is a valid legal point, there is a valid legal point, an unsettled one. Orly Taitz agrees - and that's great. But she's not important. Donald Trump is important, and he just opened the issue again, tearing open all of the wounds. You're not going to get peace on the issue until you guys cave, let it get before the Supremes, and let the Supremes write down the answer, nailing down for the next century WHO, precisely, is "natural born".
#26. To: Vicomte13 (#24)
You're a pretty lousy mouthpiece if you don't know that Congress has always provided the definition of NB status. The Constitution requires only that a prez be natural-born but it does not and never has defined what NB is. Congress defines that and they have changed their minds a number of times, expanding the definition generally. If Obama is ineligible, it was due to his mother's age, not the location of his birth. Congress defines NB. The Court only resolves oversights and special cases in NB cases. That you think otherwise tells me you don't know much about the law and about history. This notion that you are peddling that it is the Court's job to define NB and that they've just been avoiding it is just silly.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest"While born in Canada, Cruz and allies have said he is eligible for the presidency because his mother's status as an American citizen made him a citizen upon his birth."
#20. To: misterwhite, SOSO, Vicomte13 (#13)
I don't have the answer. No one does. The Supreme Court has not defined a natural born citizen. Meaning Trump is 100% correct -- this could be a potential stumbling block.
#24. To: TooConservative (#20)
(Edited)
The idea that the Court is the sole arbiter of NB status is ridiculous. As was Vicomte's earlier nonsensical post about it.
Replies to Comment # 24. The idea that Congress can simply define terms in the Constitution without being subject to judicial review is what is ridiculous.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 24.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]