How can a lawyer win every case when there’s always at least one opposing lawyer? Cruz has won major Supreme Court cases, so he’s obviously a good lawyer. Most lawyers never get near the Supreme Court.
The “Tire” case was about a foreign company (I think it was Chinese, but not sure) stole the designs of a Floridian for a particular heavy duty tire and also the inventors list of buyers and the Owner was about to go bankrupt. Thank goodness the case was lost and the American got his company and his inventions and clients back. I don’t believe Cruz argued the case, but did prepare the defense.
Cruz was a corporate lawyer for Morgan Lewis. I don’t know how much choice they get about their cases, but this is old news that Dewhurst tried to use in 2012.
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/07/texas-size-mudballs-in-gop-senate-runoff/
And most lawyers do not hear this from a Supreme Court Justice...
Justice Kennedy speaking to Ted Cruz, “Is there some rule that you can’t confess error in your state?”
DRETKE v. HALEY https://www.oyez.org/cases/2003/02-1824
argued March 2, 2004, Opinion of the Supreme Court Announced May 3, 2004 (Summary: Ted Cruz fought to keep a man in jail for 16 years for stealing a calculator from Wal-Mart, Cruz lost his argument before the Supreme Court as He has many, many times, see his bio page at Oyez by clicking R. Cruz under Advocates...argued for the petitioner)
Also, from the NYT, January 2016
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/12/opinion/the-brutalism-of-ted-cruz.html?_r=0
The case reveals something interesting about Cruz’s character. Ted Cruz is now running strongly among evangelical voters, especially in Iowa. But in his career and public presentation Cruz is a stranger to most of what would generally be considered the Christian virtues: humility, mercy, compassion and grace. Cruz’s behavior in the Haley case is almost the dictionary definition of pharisaism: an overzealous application of the letter of the law in a way that violates the spirit of the law, as well as fairness and mercy.
Uh No he lost most case, hes actually a sub-par lawyer not even hitting the 50 percent mark for average skills. As far as his USSC cases those were whats known as easy cases where the law was pretty clear.
Bottom line tho is he shows he will say and do anything for money - even doing a John Robert’s/Paul Ryan impression of a conservative to hitch his wagon to the Tea Party.