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.”