Rand Paul: Cruz Likely to Face Dem Court Challenge of His Eligibility

[mystery-ak]

http://www.newsmax.com/PrintTemplate.aspx/?nodeid=708916


Newsmax
Rand Paul: Cruz Likely to Face Dem Court Challenge of His Eligibility
Sunday, January 10, 2016 04:08 PM

By: Greg Richter

Rand Paul said Sunday that if his GOP presidential rival Ted Cruz wins the nomination, he's likely to see a court challenge from Democrats.

The question of Cruz's qualifications has been a hot topic in recent days after national front-runner Donald Trump brought it up, leading to all the other candidates being asked about it. Cruz is mounting a serious challenge to Trump in Iowa, where caucus participants will be first to vote on Feb. 1.

Cruz, a U.S. Senator from Texas, was born in Canada, but says he is a natural-born American as required by the Constitution, because his mother was an American citizen, though his father was a native of Cuba and a naturalized Canadian at the time.

"I think the Democrats will challenge it, at the very least, and I think it will have to decided by the Supreme Court," Paul, who represents Kentucky in the Senate, said Sunday on "Face the Nation."

"The thing is, I think all experts agree that he was naturally born in Canada, and so the legal question is: Can you be naturally born in Canada and also be considered a natural-born American citizen, and it hasn’t been decided," Cruz said.

Democratic Florida Rep. Alan Grayson has said he will file a lawsuit challenging Cruz's right to be president if he becomes the nominee.

[Right_in_Virginia]

The question of Cruz's qualifications has been a hot topic in recent days after national front-runner Donald Trump brought it up

OMG.  Does this mean no one else was aware that Cruz was a Canadian citizen even though he renounced the citizenship in 2014??  And until Trump answered a question about Cruz's eligibility, there wasn't a cauldron of DNC lawyers preparing a legal challenge?  This is truly amazing. 

[libertybele]

It's really a shame.  Hussein who is so anti-American, anti-patriotism becomes president, sells this country down the river, attacks our freedoms and though his birthplace and citizenship have been in question; he's accepted.  Cruz who undoubtedly loves this country and is a true American patriot, is being questioned.  Very sad to say the least. Definite double set of standards for liberal lunatics.

[truth_seeker]

OMG.  Does this mean no one else was aware that Cruz was a Canadian citizen even though he renounced the citizenship in 2014??  And until Trump answered a question about Cruz's eligibility, there wasn't a cauldron of DNC lawyers preparing a legal challenge?  This is truly amazing. 

A long thread took place today on FR covering both sides, and with many taking the position Cruz does NOT meet the NBC criteria.

It has NEVER been tested in the USSC. Many say it needs to be.

[libertybele]

A long thread took place today on FR covering both sides, and with many taking the position Cruz does NOT meet the NBC criteria.

It has NEVER been tested in the USSC. Many say it needs to be.

Given that Cruz has spoken out against some of those on the Supreme Court, I highly doubt that they would rule in his favor.

[Fishrrman]

Once again (a re-post)...

If Ted Cruz wins the nomination -- or if he accepts the VP slot after Trump wins -- expect court challenges in all fifty states and the District of Columbia challenging his right to be on the ballot.

There will be so much noise raised that one or more cases could reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

Consider: what do the democrats have to lose by doing this?
At the very least, they raise a ruckus that will overshadow Hillary's ineptness on the campaign trail, and shoot arrows into Trump's side (if Mr. Cruz is his running mate).

At the worst, they lose (in court). But even losing is winning, considering the damage they do in the interim.

Who here is willing to predict the outcome with this iteration of the Supreme Court?
Could the left prevail on this one?

Yet, even if the left "wins" -- if the Supreme Court were to rule -against- Cruz as not satisfying the Constitutional requirements for a "natural born citizen" -- it would really be a -victory- for the right, and for conservatism.

I -prefer- the Constitutional requirement of "natural born citizen" to be as restrictive and non-inclusive as possible!

[katzenjammer]

Once again (a re-post)...

If Ted Cruz wins the nomination -- or if he accepts the VP slot after Trump wins -- expect court challenges in all fifty states and the District of Columbia challenging his right to be on the ballot.

There will be so much noise raised that one or more cases could reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

Consider: what do the democrats have to lose by doing this?
At the very least, they raise a ruckus that will overshadow Hillary's ineptness on the campaign trail, and shoot arrows into Trump's side (if Mr. Cruz is his running mate).

At the worst, they lose (in court). But even losing is winning, considering the damage they do in the interim.

Who here is willing to predict the outcome with this iteration of the Supreme Court?
Could the left prevail on this one?

Yet, even if the left "wins" -- if the Supreme Court were to rule -against- Cruz as not satisfying the Constitutional requirements for a "natural born citizen" -- it would really be a -victory- for the right, and for conservatism.

I -prefer- the Constitutional requirement of "natural born citizen" to be as restrictive and non-inclusive as possible!

Yes, the clause was written and included for a definite purpose; and the need for it has not diminished over time.  (That is why we have seen a multi-decade effort to attack it!)