The rise of Ted Cruz as a significant contender for the Republican presidential nomination once sparked a contentious debate, fueled by none other than Donald Trump. Trump, known for his political maneuvering, attempted to undermine Cruz’s momentum by questioning his eligibility to even run for president, citing Cruz’s birthplace outside the United States. This challenge echoed Trump’s earlier, and similarly unfounded, conspiracy theories about Barack Obama’s birthplace.
At the heart of the issue was the simple question: Where Was Ted Cruz Born? The location of his birth ignited a national conversation about what it truly means to be a “natural born Citizen” of the United States, a constitutional requirement for holding the highest office in the land.
Ted Cruz’s Canadian Birth and Family Background
Ted Cruz was indeed born in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, in 1970. His parents were Rafael Bienvenido Cruz and Eleanor Darragh. His father, Rafael, was a Cuban native and not a U.S. citizen at the time of Ted’s birth. However, his mother, Eleanor, was an American citizen, born in Delaware, and crucially, she retained her U.S. citizenship throughout her time living in Canada. According to information released by Cruz’s campaign, Eleanor was in Canada on a work permit and never sought Canadian citizenship or permanent residency.
This detail is paramount: because his mother was a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth, Ted Cruz automatically acquired U.S. citizenship at birth. He moved to the United States at the age of four. Years later, in 2013, when Cruz released his birth certificate, it was discovered by the Dallas Morning News that he was also considered a Canadian citizen due to being born in Canada. Cruz stated he was unaware of this dual citizenship and subsequently renounced his Canadian citizenship.
The “Natural Born Citizen” Clause and Presidential Eligibility
The U.S. Constitution stipulates that only a “natural born Citizen” is eligible to be president. While the Constitution itself doesn’t explicitly define “natural born Citizen,” legal scholars have generally interpreted it to include anyone who is a citizen at birth, without needing to go through a naturalization process. Under this widely accepted interpretation, Ted Cruz unequivocally qualifies as a natural born citizen.
This interpretation is supported by a Harvard Law Review article penned by two former U.S. Solicitor Generals, Neal Katyal and Paul Clement. They stated unequivocally, “Despite the happenstance of a birth across the border, there is no question that Senator Cruz has been a citizen from birth and is thus a ‘natural born Citizen’ within the meaning of the Constitution.” Their expert legal opinion underscored the prevailing understanding that birthplace alone is not the sole determinant of “natural born” status, particularly when a parent is a U.S. citizen.
However, it’s also important to note that the Supreme Court has never formally ruled on the specific eligibility criteria for the presidency concerning citizenship and birthplace. Legal experts suggest it is unlikely the courts would even take on such a case, and challenging a candidate’s qualifications in court would be legally complex, requiring a citizen to prove they have standing to bring such a challenge.
Laurence Tribe, a distinguished Harvard Law professor who taught both Cruz and Obama, described the constitutional questions surrounding Cruz’s eligibility as “murky and unsettled.” Despite this acknowledged murkiness, Professor Tribe also pointed out that historical precedent and the “arc of history” suggest that individuals in Cruz’s situation are indeed considered to meet the qualifications for president.
Political Reactions and the Controversy’s Impact
Despite the legal consensus, the political ramifications of the “where was Ted Cruz born” question were significant. Some of Cruz’s Republican rivals, such as Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio, publicly dismissed the challenges to his eligibility. However, not all Republicans were as quick to defend him.
Iowa Governor Terry Branstad, for example, fueled the controversy by stating that the eligibility questions were “fair game.” Kentucky Senator Rand Paul even quipped that Cruz was qualified to be the Prime Minister of Canada, adding fuel to the fire. Senator John McCain, who himself faced similar questions during his 2008 presidential run due to his birth in the Panama Canal Zone (then a US military base), initially suggested Cruz’s eligibility “ought to be looked at,” though he later retracted his statement.
Reince Preibus, then chairman of the Republican National Committee, opted to stay out of the debate entirely, highlighting the politically sensitive nature of the issue within the Republican party.
Some Cruz supporters argued that the reluctance of the Republican establishment to defend Cruz stemmed from a desire to see someone other than him win the nomination. For his part, Cruz largely downplayed the issue, stating that the matter was “settled.”
Did Birthplace Controversy Affect Cruz’s Presidential Bid?
Despite the noise surrounding his birthplace, polling data at the time indicated that the controversy had minimal impact on Cruz’s standing with voters, particularly in Iowa. Reports from the campaign trail suggested that voters were not particularly concerned about his eligibility.
However, the persistent focus from Donald Trump did present a potential distraction for Cruz. Trump’s relentless attacks put Cruz in a difficult position, given his reluctance to directly criticize the Republican frontrunner. Cruz maintained a publicly respectful stance towards Trump, even stating, “I like Donald Trump, I respect Donald Trump. He’s welcome to toss whatever attacks he wants.”
Ultimately, while the question of “where was Ted Cruz born” became a talking point in the 2016 presidential race, it did not derail his campaign. The legal consensus and historical understanding of the “natural born citizen” clause prevailed, allowing Cruz to continue his pursuit of the presidency. The episode serves as a reminder of how political rivals can leverage even minor biographical details to raise doubts and attempt to undermine a candidate’s credibility in the high-stakes arena of presidential elections.
