Category Archives: Citizen News

NH voters cast vote for ineligible candidate Cruz?, New Hampshire ballot commission rejected efforts to remove Ted Cruz, Law of eligibility murky, Neither US Supreme Court nor any authority has explicitly ruled on natural born citizen

NH voters cast vote for ineligible candidate Cruz?, New Hampshire ballot commission rejected efforts to remove Ted Cruz, Law of eligibility murky, Neither US Supreme Court nor any authority has explicitly ruled on natural born citizen

“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.”…Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law Professor

“Ted Cruz wrote the forward for U.S. Constitution for Dummies which clearly reveals that he is not a natural born citizen.”…IL ballot challenger Bill Graham

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

 

 

Two state ballot entities recently ruled on Ted Cruz remaining on their ballots.

The Illinois state board of elections ruled that Ted Cruz is eligible as a natural born citizen.  IL is consistently listed as one of the most corrupt states in the US and the home of Obama, another non natural born citizen.

No surprise.

The New Hampshire ballot commission took a more honest approach.

“If there is a clear ruling on some issues that somebody clearly doesn’t meet, we would apply it. If there is a constitutional uncertainty about the meaning of something – which from my research and from all the stuff that was thrown at us at the commission there certainly is about the natural born citizen thing — we don’t undertake to make that decision,”

I was disappointed to find what I consider to be the most inaccurate article I have uncovered at American Thinker, February 5, 2016.

“Illinois and New Hampshire Agree Cruz is a Natural Born Citizen”

“Trump persists that Cruz’s citizenship is still an open question. It is not, and the election boards of two states, New Hampshire and Illinois, have now ruled, in response to complaints, that Sen. Ted Cruz is indeed, under the laws and Constitution of the United States, a “natural born citizen” fully eligible to be President of the United States. As the Washington Examiner reported:”

“A ballot commission in New Hampshire also ruled in favor of Cruz in January, but the language in Monday’s decision by the Illinois board took a stronger tone than the previous ruling, warning other skeptics, “Further discussion on this issue is unnecessary.””

“Indeed, it is unnecessary. The question of Cruz’s citizenship has been asked and answered. Is Trump saying that a baby born in Paris to a vacationing American family is not eligible to run for president and must be “naturalized” like some illegal alien from Guadalajara?

Some noted legal scholars would beg to differ from Trump’s concern that Cruz is not in fact a “natural born” citizen.

Jonathan Adler, who teaches courses in constitutional, administrative, and environmental law at Case Western University School of Law, writes in the Washington Post:

Ted Cruz was born in Canada. His mother was a U.S. citizen. His father, a Cuban, was not. Under U.S. law, the fact that Cruz was born to a U.S. citizen mother makes him a citizen from birth. In other words, he is a “natural born citizen” (as opposed to a naturalized citizen) and is constitutionally eligible.”

“Also agreeing with Cruz’s eligibility are two constitutional scholars who have argued cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. As the Washington Post reported:

Writing in the Harvard Law Review, two former top Supreme Court litigators, Neal Katyal and Paul Clement, said: “All the sources routinely used to interpret the Constitution confirm that the phrase ‘natural born Citizen’ has a specific meaning: namely, someone who was a U.S. citizen at birth with no need to go through a naturalization proceeding at some later time.”

“Now two state boards of election have certified Cruz’s eligibility, which is beyond dispute, no matter how much Trump whines, pouts, and throws out groundless accusations.”

Read more:

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/illinois_and_new_hampshire_agree_cruz_is_a_natural_born_citizen.html

Aside from being wrong on the definition of natural born citizen, this article is blatantly inaccurate:

New Hampshire did not rule that Cruz is a natural born citizen.

It omitted the opinion of constitutional expert Laurence Tribe of Harvard:

“Cruz says this is all settled law, but Harvard’s Laurence Tribe disagrees.

“It clearly is not settled law,” Tribe said in recent an interview.”

“That’s because Tribe says Cruz is a constitutional “originalist,” who believes the document should be followed to the letter. Tribe says jurists who share such a view might well conclude that Cruz is not eligible to be president — because he was not born in America.

According to Tribe, this shows that Cruz is trying to have it both ways.”

http://www.wbur.org/2016/01/15/donald-trump-ted-cruz-laurence-tribe-citizenship

From The Dallas Morning News November 24, 2015.

“The New Hampshire ballot commission today rejected efforts to kick Canada-born Sen. Ted Cruz off the primary ballot based on his birth outside the United States.

That clears a key legal and political obstacle as the Texas Republican seeks the GOP nomination for president. But it’s not a clear win on the question of eligibility.

Rather, the panel found that with the law of eligibility so murky, it can’t second-guess the senator’s own claims that he passes constitutional muster. Neither the U.S. Supreme Court nor any other authority has explicitly ruled that someone like Cruz — born on foreign soil, with one American parent – can or cannot be president.

“It would be really nice if somebody would get this issue of law decided who has authority to decide constitutional issues, so every four years we don’t have this come up again,” said Manchester attorney Brad Cook, a Republican who chairs the 5-member New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission.”

Read more:

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2015/11/regardless-of-canadian-birth-ted-cruz-survives-ballot-challenge-in-new-hampshire.html/

AMERICAN THINKER OWES THE PUBLIC AN APOLOGY.

Obama White House media boast 4.9 percent unemployment rate, Record job growth? not if you are white, White labor force participation dropped 3.2 % under Obama, White Civilian noninstitutional population dropped 1.5 million Hispanic rose almost 8 million

Obama White House media boast 4.9 percent unemployment rate, Record job growth? not if you are white, White labor force participation dropped 3.2 % under Obama, White Civilian noninstitutional population dropped 1.5 million Hispanic rose almost 8 million

“In December 2014 there were 18 million immigrants (legal and illegal) living in the country who had arrived since January 2000. But job growth over this period was just 9.3 million — half of new immigration.”…Center for Immigration Studies February 2015

“There’s no other way to say this. The official unemployment rate, which cruelly overlooks the suffering of the long-term and often permanently unemployed as well as the depressingly underemployed, amounts to a Big Lie.”…Gallup CEO Jim Clifton 

“the Times of the nineteenth of December had published the official forecasts of the output of various classes of consumption goods in the fourth quarter of 1983, which was also the sixth quarter of the Ninth Three-Year Plan. Today’s issue contained a statement of the actual output, from which it appeared that the forecasts were in every instance grossly wrong. Winston’s job was to rectify the original figures by making them agree with the later ones.”…George Orwell, “1984”

 

 

Citizen Wells began warning you in 2008. The signs were all around. Obama and the Obama camp were spewing lies, Orwellian lies and the masses were entranced, captivated, brainwashed.

Obama’s promises of jobs, improved and cheaper healthcare, all lies.

And the lies continue and the Obama Ministry of Truth, the mainstream media keeps helping him.

From WhiteHouse.gov, aka Big Brother, February 5, 2016.

“Summary:
In January, the unemployment rate fell below 5 percent for the first time in eight years as the longest streak of private-sector job growth on record continued.”

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016/02/05/employment-situation-january

From Obama, the liar in chief, February 5, 2016.

“THE PRESIDENT:  TGIF, everybody.  I wanted to stop by, because as you’re aware by now, America’s businesses created another 158,000 jobs last month.  After reaching 10 percent in 2009, the unemployment rate has now fallen to 4.9 percent — even as more Americans joined the job market last month.  So this is the first time that the unemployment rate has dipped below 5 percent in almost eight years.  Americans are working.

All told, over the past six years, our businesses have added 14 million new jobs.  Seventy-one straight months of private-sector job growth extends the longest streak on record.  Over the past two years, 2014 and 2015, our businesses added more jobs than any time since the 1990s.”

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/02/05/statement-president-economy

NOT IF YOU ARE A WHITE AMERICAN!

From the US Labor Dept.:

From January 2009 to January 2016.

Civilian noninstitutional population (potential employees)

White:  1,459,000 decrease.

Hispanic:   7,798,000  increase.

Labor force participation rate

White: 3.2 % decrease.

Hispanic: 2.1 % decrease.

Employed

White:  2,166,000 increase.

Hispanic: 5,099,000  increase.

Not in labor force

White: 8,873,000 increase.

Hispanic: 3,361,000 increase.

Square these numbers with what Obama, the White House and the mainstream media are telling you.

Now you can understand why over 30 percent of millennials live with family members and hunger is rampant in this country.

 

Unemployment rate drop coincides with white American labor force plummet, 6 million gain under Bush, 1.5 million drop under Obama, Why is media hiding this US Labor Dept. fact?, Protecting Obama continues

Unemployment rate drop coincides with white American labor force plummet, 6 million gain under Bush, 1.5 million drop under Obama, Why is media hiding this US Labor Dept. fact?, Protecting Obama continues

“In December 2014 there were 18 million immigrants (legal and illegal) living in the country who had arrived since January 2000. But job growth over this period was just 9.3 million — half of new immigration.”…Center for Immigration Studies February 2015

“There’s no other way to say this. The official unemployment rate, which cruelly overlooks the suffering of the long-term and often permanently unemployed as well as the depressingly underemployed, amounts to a Big Lie.”…Gallup CEO Jim Clifton 

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

Don’t take my word for it, go straight to the US Labor Dept. website and look for yourself.

Why haven’t you heard this?

The mainstream media is still protecting Obama and the Democrat presidential candidates.

So, the unemployment rate is 4.9% ???

Here is one of the reasons why.

The White American labor force plummeted 1.5 million under Obama.

Under George Bush, the White American labor force rose 6 million.

There has been the expected net growth in White Americans of employment age, millions.

But they are not getting jobs.

A high percentage of the over 30 % of millennials living with family members are white.

Donald Trump, you should be shouting this from the rooftops.

From Citizen Wells September 4, 2015.

Regardless of the unemployment rate and jobs data provided by the US Labor Department this morning, September 4, 2015, the real employment situation can also be found in their data.

White employment.

WhiteEmployment

Hispanic employment.

HispanicEmployment

I found this article by Business Insider from February 10, 2011.

“No One Looking At This Chart Could Possibly Call It A Recovery”

“Currently the problem in the US jobs market mainly lies with, what I call, the maintenance rate. This is the minimum monthly job creation rate that our enormous system–our economy and government with its revenues and liabilities–must have in order to maintain itself as population grows. Getting lost in the weeds, therefore, of monthly unemployment rates is a waste of time. After having lost 8+ million jobs from the top of the last expansion, nitpicking one’s way through the additions, revisions, and changes to the presumed size of the work force misses the point. And that’s this: any month in which the US does not create at least 125,000 jobs, from a systemic point of view, is negative. It’s less than zero.”

“Now you know why annual government budgets have blown out into the the trillions: the economic flows normally provided by a functioning economy are now provided through unemployment checks, food stamps, FDR style spending and other distributions. In short, the “economy” cannot be experiencing a recovery when, after 10 years of population growth and growth in future liabilities, the number of people employed is hovering around levels last seen in 2002-2004. Whether you chose to look at just Non-Farm Employment, or Total Employment, the US Labor Market is essentially flat-lining since a deep trough was reached in late 2009, early 2010.

Those who would make sweeping claims about a recovery in the entire economy should place these two charts shown here in their printed columns, along with the fact that the US population has grown by over 25 million people since the year 2000.”

US Labor Dept. employment charts reveal no jobs recovery for native born Americans, September 4, 2015, Low wage part time jobs going to immigrants, Business Insider warning from 2011, Economic flows provided through unemployment checks food stamps FDR style spending

Illinois Cruz ballot challenge dismissal not court ruling, Citizen not equal or equivalent to natural born citizen, Citizen only worked in 1789 when constitution adopted, Citizen Wells rectifies Rush Limbaugh statements, Graham update

Illinois Cruz ballot challenge dismissal not court ruling, Citizen not equal or equivalent to natural born citizen, Citizen only worked in 1789 when constitution adopted, Citizen Wells rectifies Rush Limbaugh statements, Graham update

“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.”…Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law Professor

“Ted Cruz wrote the forward for U.S. Constitution for Dummies which clearly reveals that he is not a natural born citizen.”…IL ballot challenger Bill Graham

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

 

 

***  Update February 4, 2016 at 1:45 PM  See Below  ***

I caught part of the Rush Limbaugh show yesterday and then went to the transcripts.

I thought that I heard Rush mumble something derogatory about the Cruz ballot challenge in Illinois and challenges to Cruz’s eligibility as a natural born citizen.

From Rush Limbaugh February 3, 2016.

Illinois Election Board Declares Cruz Eligible to Run

RUSH: It was, by the way, the Illinois Board of Elections that has declared Ted Cruz a natural born citizen.  “The state’s [Board of Elections] ruled that Cruz met the citizenship criteria to appear on the state’s primary ballot.  Two state residents, William Graham and Lawrence Joyce, challenged Cruz’s eligibility with the board, claiming his name should not appear on the March 15 primary ballot because his candidacy did not comply with Article II of the US Constitution.” The Board of Elections in Illinois told those two guys to pound sand. ”

Read more:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2016/02/03/quick_hits_page

Rush links to a Hotair article which quotes the Washington Examiner.

“Ruling: Ted Cruz is a ‘natural born citizen'”

“Texas Sen. Ted Cruz secured two major victories Monday, winning the Republican Iowa caucuses and also receiving a favorable decision from the Illinois Board of Elections, which confirmed his U.S. citizenship met the state’s primary ballot requirements.”

“Two Illinois objectors, Lawrence Joyce and Williams Graham, also agreed that Cruz’s citizenship did not meet guidelines in the Article II of the Constitution. But the board of elections disagreed and cleared Cruz’s name for the March 15 primary.

“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, explaining Cruz met the criteria because he “did not have to take any steps or go through a naturalization process at some point after birth.””

“A ballot commission in New Hampshire also ruled in favor of Cruz in January, but the language in Monday’s decision by the Illinois board took a stronger tone than the previous ruling, warning other skeptics, “Further discussion on this issue is unnecessary.”

Joyce told the Huffington Post Tuesday that he does not plan to appeal the board’s decision.”

Read more:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/ruling-ted-cruz-is-a-natural-born-citizen/article/2582259

Did the folks in Illinois go to Harvard too?

There is only one time in the history of the US that one could be president as just a citizen. 1789, the adoption of the US Constitution.

“no Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President . . . .”

A US citizen is not equal to or equivalent to a natural born citizen.

The US Constitution eligibility clause has not been amended.

Provisions in US law to clarify citizenship do not alter the meaning of NBC.

Period!

From Bill Graham February 3, 2016 4:13 PM

“Graham v. Cruz, Graham v. Rubio. Was advised by an experienced IL election lawyer that an appeal by Monday would be logistically difficult and expensive. In the case of these objections, partly overruled because they were inconsistent with regulation, reversal of the Board’s decision would be very unlikely. Within Illinois politics, few individuals will make the career-ending risk to resist what we call the ‘Combine’.

This effort has been worthwhile as the qualification of natural born citizen has been raised on many major news sites and has increased voter awareness. Even Mr. Trump mentioned the IL challenge. It is unfortunate that so many discard the Constitution of our Founders, but the battle will continue and those who defend the Constitution will prevail. Please consider discussing this issue openly with family and friends. Voters can reject Presidential candidates who are not qualified and who lie about their status, such as Cruz and Rubio.

‘Natural born citizen’ was intended by the founders to mean born in the America of citizen parents; no law or regulation is required to endow or rescind such citizenship. Founders wanted to discourage foreign influence on our Commander in Chief, as had caused problems in Europe. Nothing, no Board ruling or court opinion or Harvard article, can change this qualification except for an amendment to the Constitution.”

***  Update  ***

From Mr. H. Brooke Paige, plaintiff in Cruz Rubio eligibility lawsuit in Vermont:

“Praise to Mr. Graham for his noble effort to “protect, uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.” Regardless of cost or loss each citizen should, as Mr. Graham understands, make every effort to insure that all branches of government submit to the authority and directions provided by the founders and framers of our great nation in their Declaration of Independence and the Constitution they authored, debated and ratified,

Mr. Graham, take solace in knowing that you are correct in you stand and no court, no legislature and no civil board has the right to alter or adulterate our great Constitution – except through the process of Amendment delineated in that document.

God Bless you Bill Graham !

H. Brooke Paige
Washington, Vermont”

 

Sanders requests raw vote count release, I can only hope and expect that the count will be honest, Investigation desired, Washington Post reports Clinton wins at least six Iowa precincts by coin flip

Sanders requests raw vote count release, I can only hope and expect that the count will be honest, Investigation desired, Washington Post reports Clinton wins at least six Iowa precincts by coin flip

“In a handful of Democratic caucus precincts Monday, a delegate was awarded with a coin toss.
It happened in precinct 2-4 in Ames, where supporters of candidates Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton disputed the results after 60 caucus participants apparently disappeared from the proceedings.
As a result of the coin toss, Clinton was awarded an additional delegate, meaning she took five of the precinct’s eight, while Sanders received three.”…DesMoines Register

“More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both the 2008 and 2010 samples indicated that they were registered to vote. Furthermore, some of these non-citizens voted. Our best guess, based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008”… Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES)

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

 

From The Guardian February 2, 2016.

“Bernie Sanders wants raw vote count released after tight finish in Iowa caucuses”

“Bernie Sanders has called on the Democratic party to release a raw vote count in Iowa after a nail-biting finish left lingering doubts over the first, much tighter-than-expected, clash with Hillary Clinton for the presidential nomination.”

“He threw little light on an unfolding controversy over certain Iowa precincts that did not have enough Democratic party volunteers to report delegate totals for each candidate but did call on officials to take the unusual step of revealing underlying voter totals. Delegates are awarded in the Iowa Democratic contest on a precinct-by-precinct basis, irrespective of the state-wide vote for each candidate.

“I honestly don’t know what happened. I know there are some precincts that have still not reported. I can only hope and expect that the count will be honest,” he said. “I have no idea. Did we win the popular vote? I don’t know, but as much information as possible should be made available.”

Sanders’ campaign director, Jeff Weaver, told reporters he did not “anticipate we are going to contest” specific results but hoped there would be an investigation into what happened.”

Read more:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/02/bernie-sanders-requests-vote-count-tight-finish-iowa-caucus-clinton

From the Washington Post February 2, 2016.

“Clinton wins at least six Iowa precincts by coin flip”

“Letting chance decide, even in a small way, who becomes president sounds bizarre, but it didn’t just happen eight years ago. It happened Monday night in at least a handful of Iowa precincts where Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.), now locked in what Sanders called a “virtual tie” in the state, fought to a deadlock. And, in at least six of those precincts, Clinton won spare delegates, based on reporting from the Des Moines Register and video posted to social media.

In another race, those heads-or-tails contests may not have mattered. But, early Tuesday, Clinton was ahead of Sanders in Iowa by just four “state delegate equivalents,” by that state’s particular jargon. Given that slim margin and the unknown intentions of Martin O’Malley’s eight SDEs now that the former Maryland governor has suspended his presidential campaign, those coin flips are looking mighty significant.

Or not.

It’s best to let the Iowa Democratic Party explain: “On caucus night, Iowans in each precinct elect delegates to their county conventions, but the winner of the caucuses will be the candidate who accrues the most state delegate equivalents. State delegate equivalents are calculated using a ratio of state to county convention delegates. In other words, the ratio determines how many delegates the candidate would receive for the state convention based on the number of county convention delegates a candidate receives.”

Whew.

Either way, people were flipping coins in Iowa, and it was weird.

One vocal Sanders supporter filmed a coin toss in Des Moines. At first, he seemed excited — perhaps in disbelief that a candidate many had written off months ago had given Clinton a run for her money.

“It’s an actual tie,” Benjamin O’Keefe said. “You can’t even write this.”

Then, the caucus got down to business. It had split, 61-61; Clinton was awarded two delegates, and Sanders was awarded two. What would become of the fifth delegate?

Enter the coin. Tails — Clinton won.

“What?” O’Keefe said. “… Can you explain this to us?” Someone did, adding insult to injury by saying “Touchdown Seahawks!” — a reference to a 2012 NFL controversy over what many consider to be a terribly random call.

“So by coin flip, Hillary Clinton has won this precinct,” O’Keefe said. He shrugged and smiled — the smile of a man consigned to his fate by powers beyond his understanding or control. “I don’t even know,” he said, gesturing confusedly at unfazed caucus-goers as the result was announced and Clinton supporters cheered.

“That’s the official rule,” a woman who announced the result added.”

Read more:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/02/02/clinton-wins-at-least-six-iowa-precincts-by-coin-flip/

 

 

Joyce and Graham Illinois ballot challenges overruled, February 1, 2016, IL state board of elections, Appeals next?, What was their basis in law for stating Cruz is a natural born citizen?

Joyce and Graham Illinois ballot challenges overruled, February 1, 2016, IL state board of elections, Appeals next?, What was their basis in law for stating Cruz is a natural born citizen?

“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.”…Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law Professor

“Ted Cruz wrote the forward for U.S. Constitution for Dummies which clearly reveals that he is not a natural born citizen.”…IL ballot challenger Bill Graham

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

 

 

***  Update Feb 1, 2016 5:55 PM  ***

IL State board response (thanks to commenter 4zoltan)

http://www.elections.state.il.us/Downloads/AboutTheBoard/PDF/02_01_16SOEBAgenda.pdf

***

Bill Graham contacted Citizen Wells today with the results of his Illinois ballot challenge to Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio.

February 1, 2016 1:33 PM.

“IL Election Board voted unanimously that Cruz and Rubio are NBC and rejected objections of Joyce (Cruz) and Graham (Cruz, Rubio)
Let’s keep up the pressure whenever we see the opportunity.”

From the IL state board of elections website:

“GRAHAM V CRUZ TED CRUZ PRESIDENT 1/8/2016 2:40 PM OVERRULED
GRAHAM V RUBIO MARCO RUBIO PRESIDENT 1/8/2016 2:40 PM OVERRULED”

Attorney Lawrence J. Joyce also had his challenge denied.

“JOYCE V CRUZ TED CRUZ PRESIDENT 1/6/2016 4:06 PM OVERRULED”

https://www.elections.il.gov/ElectionInformation/LatestObjections.aspx?id=50&pageindex=0

Will these decisions be appealed?

From WND January 22, 2016.

“A Republican attorney in Illinois, a supporter of Ben Carson, on Friday filed a motion with the Illinois State Board of Elections to have Sen. Ted Cruz’s name removed from the official Republican primary ballot for the Illinois GOP presidential primary set for March 15.

The legal challenge confirms fellow candidate Donald Trump’s argument that the issue of eligibility to be president under Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution will dog Cruz as the Texas senator pursues the GOP nomination for president, and possibly a subsequent White House bid.

The motion from Lawrence J. Joyce, who makes his living as a pharmacist licensed in his state, notes that Cruz was born on Dec. 22, 1970, in the city of Calgary, in the Canadian province of Alberta, and that Cruz has been a citizen of the United States continuously since birth under § 301(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1401.

But Joyce’s motion challenges that Cruz is not a “natural born citizen” under the meaning of Article 2, Section 1, and as a result not eligible to be president.

The ‘nightmare scenario’

“I have principally two reasons for doing this,” Joyce explained to WND in an email. “First, I think Dr. Carson would make both a better president of the United States and a better nominee of the Republican Party.

“Second, I am terrified that if we don’t get this cleared up right now, if Ted Cruz does become the nominee, the Democrats will cherry-pick which court or election board they will petition to have him declared to be ineligible in September or October,” Joyce continued.

“The result could be that the Democrats may chalk up a string of three or four or five victories [in their election board petitions] in a row, potentially forcing Cruz to resign the nomination (if for no other reason than that fund raising would quickly dry up),” Joyce explained.

“Then Mr. [Karl] Rove and company would hand-pick his replacement as the nominee,” he concluded.”

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/motion-demands-cruz-be-removed-from-illinois-ballot/

 

Illinois Cruz Rubio ballot challenge update, February 1, 2016, Bill Graham confronts IL Board of Elections, Sworn oath to support the Constitution, Indiana Law Review state may exclude presidential candidate if not qualified

Illinois Cruz Rubio ballot challenge update, February 1, 2016, Bill Graham confronts IL Board of Elections, Sworn oath to support the Constitution, Indiana Law Review state may exclude presidential candidate if not qualified

“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.”…Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law Professor

“Ted Cruz wrote the forward for U.S. Constitution for Dummies which clearly reveals that he is not a natural born citizen.”…IL ballot challenger Bill Graham

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

 

 

Bill Graham has challenged Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio on their eligibility to be on the Illinois ballot as natural born citizens.

Here are more updates from Mr. Graham:

January 30, 2016 10:51 pm.

“Monday 10:30 I present to the IL Board of Elections that Rubio and Cruz lied in their Statement of Candidacy that they are NBC and qualified to serve as POTUS. The is fraud against the State. Hearing officer recommended Board deny my objections; legal counsel to Board concurred. I will make a brief statement that members would abandon their sworn oath to support the Constitution if they do not honor the Founders intent and Supreme Court rulings defining that NBC means born here to citizen parents. I regret that I may not be able to prevail, but pray the effort will get enough attention of the voters to make a difference in how they vote. Would be nice to have some patriots join me and Mr Joyce, who also raised an objection. State of Illinois building on Randolph, floor 14, suite 1400-100. Security check at ground level can take up to 30 minutes. Let’s keep up the fight to defend the Constitution!”
January 31, 2016 4:19 pm.

“IL Board Hearing officer said there are no particular restrictions in addressing the Board on Monday. I crafted two statements each ~1400 words. Cruz statement is focused on founders intent and responsibilities of the oath of Board Members to support constitution; Rubio is on these plus Wong Kim Ark and 14th Amendment. I claim a Board determination of NBC for either candidate is unlawful.”

From the Indiana Law Review:

“D. Whether a State May Refuse To Put a Presidential Candidate on the Ballot Because It Concludes the Candidate Is Not Qualified ”

” If a state chooses to evaluate the qualifications of presidential candidates, there is no inherent power of Congress standing in its way,”

“Just as there was historical precedent for states including unqualified candidates on the presidential ballot, so, too, is there precedent for states excluding unqualified candidates from the ballot. In fact, there has been a trend of state regulation increasingly scrutinizing the qualifications of presidential candidates, even apart from pending legislation in the “birther” context.”

“They arguably have the power to add qualifications to candidates seeking the office of President.359 The less intrusive step of examining existing constitutional qualifications is likely within the purview of state control.”

“The 20th Amendment does not prevent a state from excluding a presidential or a vice presidential candidate who is not qualified to hold the office.”

“A state inquiry into qualifications could take one of several forms.377 It might be simply ministerial, requiring candidates to verify that they are qualified. It could include a certification, such as a signature under penalty of perjury affirming that one meets the qualifications. It may require a low level of verification, such as an attachment of copies of documentary support for proof of residence and citizenship. Or it may require a high level of verification, such as original source documents (like a “long-form birth certificate”). The inquiry might be required as a disclosure when a candidate seeks to file for office, or as one that an election official is authorized to make under certain circumstances. Such state regulations would be permissible as long as they simultaneously existed within other constitutional boundaries.”

http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=11145&context=ilj