Sanders supporter to sue over Cruz’s citizenship status

A Bernie Sanders supporter is challenging Ted Cruz’s citizenship status in a birther lawsuit he hopes the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) will shed some light upon.

Texas resident Newton Schwartz Sr. said in his filing late this week: “This 229-year question has never been pled, presented to or finally decided by or resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court. Only the U.S. Supreme Court can finally decide, determine judicially and settle this issue now,” the lawsuit states.

“However persuasive, one finds each side in this debate, the final decision ultimately rests in the hands of five or more of nine Justices on the Supreme Court as mandated by the Constitution.”

During the recent GOP debate in South Carolina GOP front-runner Donald Trump advised Cruz to seek a declaratory judgment on the matter, whether the Supreme Court decides to consider the question or not. There is the question of “standing” in any legal matter. Does Schwartz have standing to bring a lawsuit?

Article Three of the US Constitution, § 2, cl. 1 says “The Judicial Power shall extend to all Cases (and Controversies…”

Writer Ann Coulter says Cruz is not a “natural born citizen.”

Coulter quotes the Constitution: “No Person except a natural-born Citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

From Coulter’s column on TownHall.com:

The phrase “natural-born” is a legal term of art that goes back to Calvin’s Case, in the British Court of Common Pleas, reported in 1608 by Lord Coke. The question before the court was whether Calvin — a Scot — could own land in England, a right permitted only to English subjects. 

The court ruled that because Calvin was born after the king of Scotland had added England to his realm, Calvin was born to the king of both realms and had all the rights of an Englishman.

It was the king on whose soil he was born and to whom he owed his allegiance — not his Scottish blood — that determined his rights. 

Not everyone born on the king’s soil would be “natural-born.” Calvin’s Case expressly notes that the children of aliens who were not obedient to the king could never be “natural” subjects, despite being “born upon his soil.” (Sorry, anchor babies.) However, they still qualified for food stamps, Section 8 housing and Medicaid.

Schwartz’s lawsuit already interferes with the Cruz campaign in that it questions his very eligibility during a time period when he will be taking his campaign for President before various state primary elections. The lawsuit itself could affect a chunk of votes. People don’t want to throw their votes away. Cruz’s little problem could result in more votes for Trump, but the lawsuit itself is not being instigated by Trump, who during the GOP South Carolina debate suggested that the ongoing question of Cruz’s eligibility could affect Trump’s decision to select Cruz as his vice president, as Cruz would not be able to ascend to the presidency if Trump could not complete his term.

In Schneider v. Rusk (1964) SCOTUS said the rights of citizenship of the native-born and of the naturalized person are of the same dignity, and are coextensive. The only difference drawn by the Constitution is that only the ‘natural born” citizen is eligible to be president. (Article II, section 1.)

Or…SCOTUS may decide to let the electorate decide the issue via state primaries.

It is difficult to know.

© Copyright 2016 Tanna K, All rights Reserved. Written For: Tinytown Unleashed
Share