Welcome, Guest! - or
Easy to remember!  »  VinNews.com

Houston - Texas Lawyer Files Federal 'birther' Suit Against Ted Cruz

Published on: January 15, 2016 04:01 PM
By: AP
Change text size Text Size  
Republican U.S. presidential candidates businessman Donald Trump (L) and Senator Ted Cruz speak simultaneously during the Fox Business Network Republican presidential candidates debate in North Charleston, South Carolina, January 14, 2016. REUTERS/Randall Hill  Republican U.S. presidential candidates businessman Donald Trump (L) and Senator Ted Cruz speak simultaneously during the Fox Business Network Republican presidential candidates debate in North Charleston, South Carolina, January 14, 2016. REUTERS/Randall Hill

Houston - A veteran attorney in Ted Cruz’s hometown of Houston has filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Canadian-born senator’s eligibility to be president.

In a 28-page complaint Thursday, Newton Schwartz asked the Supreme Court to decide if Cruz’s birth to an American mother and Cuban father while they lived in Calgary violates the Constitution’s “natural born citizen” requirement.

Advertisement:

Cruz argues that because his mother is American, he became a U.S. citizen at birth. But the Supreme Court hasn’t previously considered the eligibility question.

Presidential rival Donald Trump has repeatedly questioned Cruz’s presidential eligibility.

The pair squared off during Thursday night’s Republican debate. When Trump again raised the issue, Cruz shot back that though the Constitution hasn’t changed recently, his polling numbers have — driving Trump’s “birther” questions.



More of today's headlines

Nashville, TN - A Tennessee couple that won a share of the $1.6 billion Powerball jackpot says they are going to take the lump sum cash payout because they are "not... New York - Major U.S. growth mutual funds have been among the largest sellers of Apple Inc shares over the past six months, fueling speculation that the company’s...

 

Total6

Read Comments (6)  —  Post Yours »

1

 Jan 16, 2016 at 07:22 PM Haimov Says:

He can not be a president as requierements are to be born in USA or american territory such as a military base or installation
he was not born on an american military base in canada

2

 Jan 16, 2016 at 08:59 PM Anonymous Says:

Mr Haimov, Do you have another version of the Constitution? The Constitution clearly states "Natural Born Citizens" as a requirement to be US President. Which means to become a citizen "at birth" any American that has a baby overseas where child becomes US Citizen at birth is eligible to run for US President.

3

 Jan 16, 2016 at 09:39 PM eric55 Says:

#1 you are wrong it just says has to be a natural born citizen it says nothing of having to be born on US soil. you may want to interpret it that way but no court has ever ruled on it and until they do hes as natural born citizen as anyone else

4

 Jan 17, 2016 at 01:26 AM LiberalismIsADisease Says:

Reply to #1  
Haimov Says:

He can not be a president as requierements are to be born in USA or american territory such as a military base or installation
he was not born on an american military base in canada

You OBVIOUSLY cannot read the Constitution. Perhaps you have a problem understanding 1780's English?

5

 Jan 17, 2016 at 01:30 AM Mark Levin Says:

Reply to #1  
Haimov Says:

He can not be a president as requierements are to be born in USA or american territory such as a military base or installation
he was not born on an american military base in canada

This two bit lawyer is making hay over this. This slimeball was debarred in 2 states, PA being one of them. This guy is a nothing who is looking for attention.

He's probably also a Trump Troll.

6

 Jan 17, 2016 at 01:45 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #2  
Anonymous Says:

Mr Haimov, Do you have another version of the Constitution? The Constitution clearly states "Natural Born Citizens" as a requirement to be US President. Which means to become a citizen "at birth" any American that has a baby overseas where child becomes US Citizen at birth is eligible to run for US President.

Not really. Where the language of the Constitution is ambiguous (as it obviously is or we wouldn't be having this discussion) the courts will look to legislative intent and extrinsic evidence to assist in interpretation. In the SCOTUS, there are two major schools of thought as to how to interpret the Constitution. The Strict Constructionists (Scalia, Alito, etc), who are backed by Ted Cruz and Republicans, believe we can only use the original intent it at the time it was written. Using this doctrine, it is likely that "natural born" means born in the U.S. The Loose Constructionists (Ginsburg, Breyer etc) are centrists/progressives, nominated by Democrats, who believe in a living, evolving Constitution, and who would likely consider Cruz to be naturally born if he has an American parent. How ironic. We liberals are greatly enjoying this. We remember Republicans arguing that Obama is not naturally born when he had an American mother and was born in Hawai'i. Payback time for your own misdeeds. This is what happens when you let stupid run your party.

7

Sign-in to post a comment

Click here to sign-in.

Scroll Up
Advertisements:
Sell your scrap gold and broken jewelry and earn hard cash sell gold today!