Tag Archives: Citizen only worked in 1789 when constitution adopted

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:


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:


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.


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”