Posted on 01/25/2016 8:03:19 AM PST by justlittleoleme
The argument is not about his “Citizenship”. Cruz IS a Citizen, he is NOT a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN as required by the Constitution. Cruz himself said he was not eligible ...then now he says he is.
It isn’t enough for him to say “there wasn’t a long enough paper trail”. Well then why did you support the guy?
If he could rewrite Obamacare in order to then rule it “constitutional”, then there should have been red flags about him years ago. Hell even Ann Coulter raised the loudest alarm about him when Bush put his name forward.
I've long debated with myself on whether it is better to place old judges with a conservative record on the court knowing they will stand firm. Or seek young conservatives that will be there for a long time, hoping that they will remain conservative.
Oh that’s a fact!
Or at least congress should actually manage to impeach one of them. Just one!
According to this website. Texas has some of the most conservative Justices in the Country.
https://ballotpedia.org/Political_outlook_of_state_supreme_court_justices
The top five most Conservative state supreme court justices according to the study are:
South Dakota
North Dakota
Texas
Alabama
Idaho
Besides' the normal Pro-Trump answer (Ted Cruz), who would you recommend to be a supreme court nominee?
Note to Trump supporters: This is one of the main reasons Cruz is my top choice, and Trump is my #2.
Should have read “NOT INVOLVED” with the court system.
>> We should demand Trump explain his vetting process for justices <<
Fuggetaboutit.
Don has already said enough. First, he said his liberal sister would make a great justice. Then he said Sam Alito was his ideal. Then he implied that Scalia was a racist.
Therefore, based on this record, I conclude that anything he says in the future won’t be worth the tape it’s recorded on.
Ted Cruz was the author on a letter in support of placing Roberts on the Supreme Court. What gives with Ted?
http://www.businessinsider.com/ted-cruz-is-bashing-john-roberts-after-years-of-praising-him-2015-6
” ‘secure the border first, then we’ll see later’ That was exactly the same thing Reagan fell for. The EXACT same play script. Amnesty, then secure the border. Well, Reagan signed the amnesty, but the border was never secured.”
Um - “secure the border first” means that - build fences, increase border patrol, etc. Then Cruz would look at how to deal with the illegals. (So opposite of Reagan). And, Cruz as always been about upholding the current law. Which includes deporting illegals.
Trump has always been for amnesty. Thru July 2015, he was for a legalization amnesty without deportations, based on merit, for the non criminals. He even used weasel words about a citizenship amnesty, so who knows about that. Since July Trump has been for a touchback amnesty.
As I said, I prefer Cruz on the two most important issues, judges and amnesty.
>> Best get his ‘birther’ settled before he goes any further <<
Dream on. No federal court will touch the issue unless somebody with standing, like a state elections official, brings suit. And even then, there’s precisely zero chance that the POTUS would rule against Cruz on appeal.
Ted says it was a mistake.
Ted says that we now need long paper trails so that we don't get somebody like Roberts.
Here’s the thing: Cruz may want a more conservative, more traditionalist nominee than Trump. However, once that person gets on the Court history tells us it’s a complete coin flip on whether that person remains conservative, remains traditionalist.
To borrow your analogy, we may have a better chance at getting a traditionalist ONTO the Court with Cruz. History says once that person is on the Court, they have a 50/50 shot at REMAINING that way.
That’s why using this as a litmus test is silly. We don’t care about what they say to get onto the Court. We only care about what they do when they’re there.
There are people all over the world that read this site, and then you wonder why other countries laugh at us...I can see why, all I have to do is read some of the cruz bots threads and it's plain as day...
Also, FYI, the reason all this garbage is on the internet is because we have turned off our T.V.’s and don't listen to the lies that the media is being told and the talking heads are no better, so they are using people like you to post the garbage we won't listen to anymore...
I don't care about Cruz, before Trump announced I didn't like any of them because other than Trump, everyone of them are a ‘globalist’ and that's not what I want for America or me A True Blue American Born, Raised and College Graduated American!!!
You just can't believe a word that comes out of Ted Cruzs' mouth
John Roberts should be a quick confirm. By Ted Cruz
>> surely there is one judge who is a Conservative with a history of conservative rulings <<
Judge J. Michael Luddig.
By capital Cruz must mean his extremely good relations with the Senate which has to confirm any picks.
😇 sarcasm
I've always "heard" that a nominee can't be subject to a litmus test or asked how they'd vote on a particular issue.
Is that tradition or law?
Were I POTUS I'd sure as heck want to ask them how they'd vote on things. Doesn't mean they'd do it but it'd be at least one more way to get inside their head.
What’s the likelihood old justices step down during Obama’s admin given a Cruz nomination vs a trump nomination?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.