Ted Cruz: Constitutional Conservative

Why I am Voting for Ted Cruz: Constitutional Conservatism

This is the first—and most important—reason that I am voting for him.  Immigration policy, a pro-life stance, thoughts on trade and defense are all important litmus tests for the Presidency.  They are things the President should do. Being an ardent, trained, Constitutional scholar, though, allows Cruz to know what the President can do.

Cruz’s website has a list of his Constitutional bona fides. Of note is the Supreme Court case Medellin v. Texas. In this case, Cruz argued that President Bush’s memorandum stating that the United States would “discharge its international obligations under the decision of the International Court of Justice in [Avena], by having State courts give effect to the decision in accordance with general principles of comity in cases filed by the 51 Mexican nationals addressed in that decision” was not a binding, enforceable, federal law that could pre-empt state judiciary practices. In other words: Cruz successfully argued against Presidential over-reach of power and protected American sovereignty.  Please note the President in question was Republican George W. Bush—whom Cruz had worked for previously.  Yet despite his former employment by, and party affiliation with, the President, Cruz defended the rights of state courts against illegal Presidential actions.

If he is willing to fight the man whom he helped elect to the Presidency in order to defend the rights of states and citizens, that’s the kind of “Washington-outsider” I want as my President.

Cruz is a brilliant man.  He knows the Constitution, and Constitutional law, better than any candidate running for office. He has argued cases involving religious liberty, 2^nd Amendment rights, US and state sovereignty, and government over-reach.

In his arguments and speeches involving government over-reach, Cruz has demonstrated dedication to a  political ideal long suppressed in this country: That the rights of Americans are not handed down by the government but endowed by their Creator.  Government exists to protect rights, not decide them and then parcel them out to select sub-sets of the citizenry. 

I have always raged against the “gimme voters” that dominate the Presidential election cycles.  The President cannot make jobs, give you a cell phone, or prevent natural disasters.  He cannot even change your tax rate. The Constitution lists very specific duties of the Presidency.  You will not find a single mention about job creation in Article II—unless you are a justice or ambassador.  In matters of trade and foreign policy the President has certain powers but they are tied to approval by the Senate.  This is why I’ve always said that Congressional and local elections are more important than the Presidential race—Congress controls the pocketbook.  Their decisions have far more meaningful impacts on our day-to –day lives.

Now what a President can do is exert influence on the Congress in order to “push through” legislation.  The most recent example of this process would be Obamacare. The majority of Congressional members who voted on the bill had not even read it—but they decided their vote based on pressure from the President and his appointees. Let’s touch base to the point made earlier: Ted Cruz argued for states rights against an order by a Republican President.  Here is a man whose loyalty is to the Constitution and the people it is meant to defend. Given all of his previous works and words, I trust that President Cruz would not harangue and cajole the Congress into an act which violated those principles. Cruz trusts the American people to decide what is best for their families.  Trust is two way street, but DC politics have turned it into a one-way alley for too many years.

I trust Ted Cruz to live by his oath of office: to defend and uphold the Constitution of the United States.