Oh, yes there has, including Cruz's very own Harvard Law professor, a constitutional scholar. He joins many others who know Cruz is not eligible.
Why didn't Rubio and Cruz even attempt to have this matter settled by a court well before running for president? Because they knew the odds of being declared ineligible were extremely high. It was better to just be quiet about the whole deal, and when challenged, simply declare their own eligibility. Maybe they should have tried fake birth certificates like Barack Hussein.
Constitutional Expert Dr. Edwin Viera begs to differ:
Attorney Mario Appuzo: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2015/03/13/a-response-to-neil-kat...
I liked, and appreciated, her clarity of speech. I have one quibble. She says that the de Vsttel treatise on 'The Law of Nations' only talks about the parents needing to be citizens for the child to be a nbc. But other sources/researchers, e.g. Attorney Mario Appuzo, make the case that the person, to be a nbc, needs ALSO to have been born on the soil (jus soli, law of the soil). See this quote, from Apuzzo's article under the heading 'Natural Born Citizen - A Place To Ask Questions And Get the Right Answers', dated February 5, 2016:
"Having examined who the original citizens were, now let us examine who the natural born citizens were. Our U.S. Supreme Court has long confirmed that the birth circumstances that make one a natural born citizen are birth in the United States to U.S. citizen parents (meaning U.S. citizen father and mother). Under the common law the nomenclature with which the Framers were familiar when they drafted and adopted the Constitution, all children born in a country to parents who were its citizens were “natives, or natural-born citizens,” and all the rest of the people were “aliens or foreigners,” who could be naturalized by some law. See Emer de Vattel, The Law of Nations, or Principles of the Laws of Nature, Applied to the Conduct and Affairs of Nations and Sovereigns, bk. 1, c. 19, sec. 212 Citizens and natives (London 1797) (1st ed. Neuchatel 1758) ("The citizens are the members of the civil society: bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens")..." Thus, he is quoting from the English translation of de Vattel. So, according to this, we are talking about both jus sanguinis - law of the blood - AND jus soli.
Either way, they all - Obama, Cruz, and Rubio - need to be brought to justice on this issue. Or we are without a law of the land - the Constitution. And are under the sway of the rule of men. A/k/a arbitrary law. A/k/a tyranny.
And I for one will not stand for it.
I'm totally sympathetic, Aaron. This is not an easy time. Personally, I have had to trust that men of honor, Oath keepers all, are organizing behind the scenes to take down the tyrant and Usurper, Obama, or whatever his real, legal name is (since we don't know, never having seen a legitimate copy of his bc). Or the grand experiment in self-governance has all been for nought; having failed to capture the loyalty of its citizenry.
I prefer to think otherwise. And am ready to respond, in support, at the appropriate time, and place, for where I live.
That's the best that I personally can do. That. And hold the vision.
As for the latter: A wise comment has been made regarding such a thing. Quote:
'Without a vision, the people perish.'
Indeed. And how we have found that out. And in spades.
Why does Mark Levin, famed radio host, lawyer, worked in the Reagan administration INSIST, and he insists that Ted Cruz is eligible? I love this presentation, very clear, and good examples given...so presents the quandary that Mark Levin a vowed constitutionalism, a vowed conservative, he is insulting all the other candidates, was for Trump, before Trump brought up the citizenship clause, now he pounds trump and insists on Cruz being eligible. I am not naysaying what is presented here at all, very much appreciated and clear, I am questioning Mark Levin.
I'm sure they have listened to the wrong people and have not actually done the research themselves.
If you look into the intent of the Founders and Framers, it is not possible to believe that Rubio, Cruz, or BO are eligible.
Beck, Levin, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, all believe in the eligibility of ineligible people -- they are ignorant, have been fooled, or are part of the problem ! When they state that these people are eligible, most people believe them !
Beck, Levin, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, are part of the problem! They are just trying to get rich off of gullible people in the USA.
Each are very truth full men and they are just like the rest of us who have our opinions. The difference between them and you are that no legal scholar supports you, but the vast number of qualified lawyers and judges have voiced their opinion. And, they do not attempt to voice their opinions for being tied to any candidate, unlike many who are anti Cruz or Rubio but do support Democrat for the Presidency in our Republican Party. I have many, many reasons for calling him a Democrat.
You are NOT a true Scholar, nor do I believe you to be an American patriot, thus your words are not worth the breath to air them.
At this point in the nomination process I have no favorite candidate but, based on my knowledge and history of our nation and Constitution, I stand by my belief that Cruz and Rubio are ineligible.