[mtrott]

“Cruz’ time will come - he’s young, and got plenty of it. At this point I’d like to see him as Trump’s A.G., prosecuting the heck out of the crime families of the last 2 Dem administrations. He’d clean things up, make a name for himself, and show that he’s Presidential timber.”

Are you a Trump birther? Because it seems to me you can’t say Cruz is ineligible now, but that he might be illegible later.

[Ancesthntr]

“Are you a Trump birther? Because it seems to me you can’t say Cruz is ineligible now, but that he might be illegible later.”

---

OK, this is a simple issue: Under the terms of the U.S. Constitution, either a particular candidate does, or does not, meet the stated qualifications to be the President of the United States, providing that he or she actually wins a Presidential election, or is the Vice President when the President dies or otherwise leaves office before his term is over, or is next in the line of succession as defined in the 25th Amendment. If you are a Cruz supporter, then presumably you also desire and expect that the Constitution should be - MUST be - adhered to, so this analysis should resonate with you.

No one is dealing with the age or residency requirements, because Cruz clearly meets them, so those 2 qualifications are off of the table .

So, we are left with the issue of whether he is a “Natural Born Citizen.” The answer to that question quite naturally depends upon HOW THE TERM IS DEFINED. Why? Because the term is not something used in every day language, and the issue hasn’t really come up in the past. It deals ONLY with the qualification to become President, and only 43 men have ever held that office since 1789.

OK, so then what is the definition? To my way of thinking, it could mean one of two different things:

1) That a person was the child of 2 people who were both American citizens at the time of his/her birth. The reasoning behind this position is that the Founders could have simply said that the person had to be a citizen, or had to be a citizen at birth, but that they used this particular term to ensure that there would be no divided loyalties in the household of the future President. By the way, the place of birth in this case is irrelevant - it depends on the citizenship status of your parents, and NOTHING else.

2) That a person was a citizen at the moment of birth, whether by “natural law” (i.e. they were born on US territory and both parents were citizens at that time - there is NO question that such a person is a citizen AND a “Natural Born Citizen” in those circumstances), or by legislated law (i.e. Congress passes, and the President signs, a bill stating that someone with one U.S. citizen parent is automatically a citizen, or that such takes place only if the U.S. citizen parent intends to return to the U.S., etc.).

OK, so what are we to conclude? Under the first definition, Ted Cruz is NOT a NBC, and thus cannot be the POTUS. Under the second definition, Ted Cruz IS a NBC, and can be the POTUS.

No conspiracy theories necessary, no name-calling necessary, just the bare, essential facts: either he is or he isn’t, ALL DEPENDENT UPON THE DEFINITION OF “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.”

Just to avoid any confusion, I am NOT certain that one of these 2 definitions is correct. I tend to believe that the 1st is the correct one, since the Founders had just fought a war in which roughly 1/3 of the population was loyal to the other side, so loyalty was a big issue, but I simply do not know the answer. What I DO know is that once the term is definitively defined, then the answer is simple for both Ted Cruz and any other person.