The national debate over whether Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is eligible to be President continues. The fact that Cruz was born on Canadian soil, to his American mother, has constitutional legal scholars at odds over whether he meets the criteria for the nation’s top office.
Now a Houston attorney has filed a suit further questioning Cruz’s eligibility and asking the Supreme Court to define the term, “natural-born citizen.”
Attorney Newton Schwartz says he felt compelled to file the suit because nobody else did. He’s now the lead plaintiff in Schwartz v. Cruz. Was he surprised no one else had filed yet?
“Surprised is an understatement,” he says. “I’m shocked.”
Time is running out on getting to the bottom of the matter, Schwartz says. He points to the Iowa caucuses that start February 1, then the New Hampshire primaries after that. There’s also the March 1 Texas and southern state ballots.
“There’s not gonna be time to determine (Cruz’s eligibility),” Schwartz says. “This is the only method that could determine it by then and it’s going to be very difficult to get it all through the courts without the cooperation of Sen. Cruz – who could get it done or he could stall it and keep it in a court here for months.”
The Constitution limits the presidency to a “natural-born citizen.” Schwartz’s lawsuit isn’t questioning the citizenship of Cruz – he is legally a citizen. Schwartz says there’s a big distinction between the two. His lawsuit is asking the court to come up with a legally agreed upon interpretation of what a “natural-born citizen” is.
As far as this lawsuit’s potential to settle the matter?
“There are people that may not wanna agree with the decision,” Schwartz says. “(But it) would be the law of the land, just like Roe v. Wade is currently the law of the land. Just like same-sex marriage, from this year, is law of the land…. It’s not a popularity contest.”
Listen to the full interview in the audio player above.