Since 2008 I have been a licensed lawyer, and almost all of that time I have been an active litigator. So I thought I had encountered at least one graduate from literally every law school in country by this point, including a couple that were not accredited. So imagine my surprise when the Washington Post managed to find someone who was a law professor at a university I had literally never heard of to claim that she is a “legal expert” and that Ted Cruz is not a natural born citizen.

Now pay attention, because the legal argument you are about to hear is so profound, yet so subtle, that it is difficult to understand if you are not a “constitutional law professor at Widener University’s Delaware Law School” like noted legal expert Mary Brigid, uh, (checks) McMahonman? McManhaman? Something like that?

Donald Trump is actually right about something: Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) is not a natural-born citizen and therefore is not eligible to be president or vice president of the United States.

* * *

Cruz is, of course, a U.S. citizen. As he was born in Canada, he is not natural born. His mother, however, is an American, and Congress has provided by statute for the naturalization of children born abroad to citizens. Because of the senator’s parentage, he did not have to follow the lengthy naturalization process that aliens without American parents must undergo. Instead, Cruz was naturalized at birth.

So, just in case you’re doubting your ability to correctly read through the haze of Mary Whatshername’s terrible writing, don’t worry: she really is saying that Cruz was “naturalized at birth” but is not a “nautral-born citizen.” And if you’ve been led to believe all this time that the principles of the English language basically demand that the two of these terms are equivalent, then, well, the Washington Post has a very important legal expert who is willing to explain to you to the contrary.

Thank Goodness Mary was available for this important task. You wouldn’t believe the mischief ordinary people can get into when they think they can interpret the constitution based on what it explicitly says.