There's a commotion about Ted Cruz getting sued (1) per Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution (2) on the basis of that being exactly what disqualifies his eligibility to run for President of the United States of America.

An accepted answer here (3) on Politics.SE refers to the Acquisition of U.S. Citizenship by a Child Born Abroad (4) and this being exactly what satisfied his mother's eligibility qualification at that time.

Per Referenced Material

Based on the above (and below) references, some items just seem to need to be verified to confirm authenticity and legitimacy of the qualification under these guidelines thereof:

  • Confirm he's 35 years old when running
  • Confirm his residence in the US for at least 14 years prior to running
    • (Has he been living in the US for 14 years)
  • Confirm he is a natural-born citizen

    • (Based on his mother's status at the time of his birth)
    • (Confirm accuracy of his mother's birth and citizenship)

      • If his mother was over 14 years old at the time of his birth, confirm his mother was physically present residing in the US for a period of 5 years
      • If his mother was under 14 years old at the time of his birth confirm his mother was physically present and residing in the US for a period of 10 years.
      • Confirm his mother (U.S. citizen parent) was physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for 10 years prior to his (Ted Cruz) birth, at least five of which were after the age of 14.


Can anyone answer any part of this with any referenced proof (in either direction to prove or disprove) and/or reference other laws which may qualify or disqualify the eligibility of Ted Cruz to run for President of the United States of America?


  • 8
    The only "referenced proof" possible for the "natural-born citizen" part is an interpretation by the Supreme Court of the meaning of that phrase in the Constitution. Such a ruling does not exist.
    – DJohnM
    Feb 20, 2016 at 0:09
  • 1
    "Confirm his mother physically resided in the US for a period of five years before birth" It's actually that his mother was physically present in the US for a period of ten years, including five years after she turned 14.
    – user102008
    Feb 20, 2016 at 1:55
  • 3
    "Can anyone put this to rest" = yes. The courts can. If and when this issue gets to the courts.
    – user1530
    Feb 20, 2016 at 5:00
  • 3
    @blip: Assuming that someone has standing, and the courts don't consider it a political question.
    – user102008
    Feb 20, 2016 at 8:53
  • 6
    @MichaelBroughton - funny how people like you ignore mountains of evidence if it proves their pet theories wrong: "Donald Trump Hammers Away At Ted Cruz's Citizenship" - this is Huff Post, not Fox News, even
    – user4012
    Feb 22, 2016 at 20:02

1 Answer 1


From Wikipedia - Ted Cruz:

Several lawsuits and ballot challenges asserting that Cruz is ineligible to become U.S. president have been filed. No lawsuit or challenge has been successful, and in February 2016, the Illinois Board of Elections ruled in Cruz's favor, stating, "The candidate is a natural born citizen by virtue of being born in Canada to his mother who was a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth."

The reference cited in the Wikipedia post says:

Merda, Chad (February 3, 2016). "Illinois election board: Ted Cruz is a natural-born citizen. Chicago Sun-Times. Chicago, Illinois. Archived from the original on February 4, 2016. Retrieved February 4, 2016. "The candidate is a natural born citizen by virtue of being born in Canada to his mother who was a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth," the board said. It pointed out that Cruz "did not have to take any steps to go through a naturalization process at some point after birth" and therefore "further discussion on this issue is unnecessary."

  • 3
    I'd like to know who downvoted this answer—the question went unanswered for years and this is an answer and checked off as resolved now. This is exactly what this community should want so if you downvote, it does no good to stay silent regarding whatever issue you see, etc. I'd like the opportunity to pacify your concern downvoter so let me know what the problem is in this particular instance. You've had ample time to vote to close and let the community speak, or flag a mod to take action otherwise. Don't stay silent now if you see a problem here and step forward and speak up. Aug 17, 2018 at 2:40
  • @The'BernieSanders'Party - Realistically, the question is on an issue that mostly only exists because people want to exist. So "-1 - I don't want this to be true" votes are to be expected, and unless stated otherwise in a comment, that's what we all know happened here.
    – T.E.D.
    May 10, 2023 at 13:50
  • If a rule exists because it exists, then the rule should be enforced or else it makes no point to have the rule in the first place. If it is not clear about US citizens giving birth to a child in another country and that child trying to be the leader of a country which they were not born, I guess some people that really don't care about that rule and those that put it in place and their reasons why or two different perspectives. I'd say based on the votes on this now and the comment above that people mostly do care about that for maybe for some of those same reasons mentioned. May 10, 2023 at 14:26

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .