People for strict construction 'til it's inconvenient

Presidential candidates should not have to fret about where their parents were born.

Imagine President Ted Cruz moving into the White House with First Lady Heidi Cruz and their two daughters under a cloud of doubt about the legitimacy of his election. A new Monmouth University poll finds one-third of Republican voters and voters who lean Republican either don’t believe or aren’t sure whether the Texas senator meets the “natural born Citizen” requirement in the Constitution for eligibility for U.S. president.

Whatever else one might say about him, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz is a brilliant lawyer. Houston attorney Newton Schwartz, who said he isn’t connected to any campaign, filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Texas. The court is being asked to settle the issue of eligibility.

The junior senator from Texas probably has a stable of high-powered legal eagles available to parse the eligibility issue. If his team can find a path to resolve this problem fully and finally, whether it’s the Schwartz lawsuit or other means, Cruz should do so.

It’s important to have certainty on the eve of a presidential election — remember Bush vs. Gore?

At least the facts are clear. Cruz, who was born in Canada in 1970 to an American mother and Cuban father, is a U.S. citizen. But constitutional scholars disagree as to what the facts mean.

Although the weight of authority holds that there is no constitutional question about Cruz’s eligibility to be elected president, a solid minority of credentialed scholars — particularly some in the originalist camp — disagree. Did the framers of the U.S. Constitution intend for the president of the U.S. to be born in the United States?

Cruz has said that if elected he would appoint adherents of originalism — the view that the Constitution’s meaning is fixed as of the time of its enactment — to the Supreme Court.

No matter how tempting it is to hoist Cruz on his own petard and examine Cruz’s legal standing using the originalist framework, a narrow construction of the eligibility requirements for president under the Constitution is not in the best interest of our nation.

A presidential candidate’s fitness to serve — or lack thereof — should have nothing to do with where his parents were born.

In this global world, voters should be able to cast their nets widely for leaders of this country. Even the fact that a candidate is a naturalized citizen should not disqualify him.

There’s no room in a democratic government for a two-tiered system. Once you are a U.S. citizen, you should receive the same rights and privileges as those born on U.S. soil.

This is an important issue not just for Cruz but for all future presidential candidates.

This vignette in U.S. history supports the well-known adage that people are for strict construction until it’s inconvenient. Perhaps at minimum, this experience should teach Cruz and his supporters to speak with more humility when lecturing others about strict construction of the Constitution.

— Houston Chronicle