Motion demands Cruz be removed from Illinois ballot9

WND ^ | 01/22/16 | Jerome Corsi

[Enlightened1]

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.

[JediJones]

A lawsuit is not a big deal. McCain and Obama got sued over the same thing. Anyone can sue anybody for anything. It’s meaningless. To be “afraid” of it is just silly.

[Duchess47]

That’s something I don’t understand at all. How am I, a voter, not harmed by someone on the ballot who is not eligible? I do think Cruz lost the election by not addressing it and is now only staying in to bleed off support for Trump. I think now he’s ego driven and being petty, trying to prevent Trump from getting a clear majority.

[Duchess47]

If they do, Cruz will bear much of the responsibility for it.

[JediJones]

Cruz isn’t a “foreigner.” That is an utterly laughable statement.

I absolutely support any lawsuit because I know Cruz will win. Somehow I doubt it will shut up the small number of people who are fanatical about this non-issue. We’ll just hear that the judge violated the Constitution or something.

[JediJones]

Cruz did address the so-called “issue” (if you can call a small minority of ignorant people wildly misinterpreting the constitution an issue). Did you not see the last debate?

Cruz hasn’t lost the election. Everyone who is polling lower should be the ones who get out. In a 2-man race, Cruz beats Trump according to some polling. Trump’s the one who should be worried about winning, because those others will start dropping out and becoming irrelevant. We may, however, see many stay in because they know them being in helps Trump, who is far more favored by the D.C. establishment desperate to maintain the status quo than Cruz. Trump has said many times he was part of the establishment before he started running and is now praising the establishment openly in his speeches.

[RightLady]

How does Cruz “fix it”???

[Duchess47]

At this point, I don’t know. He’s treated it as a joke, not a serious problem. Now that suits are filed, I really don’t know.

[Duchess47]

Yes, I saw the last debate. Cruz treated it as a joke. That is not addressing the issue. If you can call at this point 25% of the Republican voters a small minority, you are not thinking clearly.

[cynwoody]

I see trouble in the future if foreigners are permitted to run.

Cruz is at least as American as you are.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

Cruz is at least as American as you are.

Well, technically yes.

Mexicans, Panamanians, Colombians, Brazilians and Canadians are all Americans.

[cynwoody]

A more relevant question is, Is Billy Ayers more American than Barack Obama, Ted Cruz, or Prairie Lady?

Because, as is obvious by inspection, Billy Ayers passes all the birfer tests with trampling colors!

August 2001

Born in Glen Ellyn, Illinois, which makes him natural born. To two citizen parents, Mary Andrew Ayers and Thomas G. Ayers, who were also natural born citizens, which makes him redundantly natural born. His daddy was a big American crony crapitalist, being CEO of Commonwealth Edison, and that doesn't hurt.

Why do I think this dude is not what Jefferson and Madison and the rest of them had in mind as Natural Born?

The intent of the NBC clause was to preclude the likes of Maximilian I of Mexico ever taking hold in the US. There is no way the Founders could ever have foreseen the likes of Barack Hussein Obama! Or Billy Ayers (if he were ever to run).

We need to stop arguing about what NBC means and agree that anybody who is a birthright citizen is eligible.

That is what SCOTUS will hold, if they are ever forced to hold.

[Nita Nupress]

I absolutely support any lawsuit because I know Cruz will win.

Oh, and you can control the rulings of liberal, hand-picked judges? You're probably saying "I know Cruz will win" because of your viewpoint that Cruz is legal to run, right? But it's not your reality or my reality that matters. (I like Cruz, just so you know, and I would vote for him).

It's just like the 2 times when obamacare went before the SC and Roberts ruled the wrong way... Reality and "Truth" did not matter one iota. So you can sit and tell yourself all you want that "Cruz will win," but that just tells me that you don't understand the concept of handpicked judges with an agenda and how corrupt the Washington Cartel is. Or maybe you just don't want to see it, i don't know.

Somehow I doubt it will shut up the small number of people who are fanatical about this non-issue. We’ll just hear that the judge violated the Constitution or something.

Don't assume everyone you're talking to is a Cruz-hater. You may be a Trump-hater, which is why you're assuming, but like i said, I love Cruz. Yes, I'm very mad at him for not handling this BEFORE running, but i would still vote for him if he beat Trump..

Unfortunately, your "non-issue" could very well be an "issue," whether you want to admit it or not.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

Is Billy Ayers more American than Barack Obama, Ted Cruz

Well, if you mean eligible....yes. Although he's a criminal and a traitor, his accident of birth makes him eligible (God help us)

Why do I think this dude is not what Jefferson and Madison and the rest of them had in mind as Natural Born?

He is, but they also would have shot him.

We need to stop arguing about what NBC means

No we don't. We need to "stop arguing" and follow the framers original intent...the meaning at the time.

and agree that anybody who is a birthright citizen is eligible.

You would accept anchor babies as candidates.

That is what SCOTUS will hold, if they are ever forced to hold.

They already did. And it's two citizen parents born on our soil. A hundred years after the signing.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

,

[Nita Nupress]

We need to stop arguing about what NBC means and agree that anybody who is a birthright citizen is eligible. That is what SCOTUS will hold, if they are ever forced to hold.

OR, Cruz could've handled this legally, run for President, then Trump gracefully pick him for the VP spot under the older Trump for 8 years and then Cruz get elected as President for another 8 years.

I had it all planned out, but those 2 dumb b*stards didn't listen to me. lol.

[Nita Nupress]

Yes, that’s why I think Trump needs to just let it ride. If he does anything it will cause major upset in the party and make Cruz a martyr.

Let's just hope it's a non-issue and that Trump takes Iowa/NH/etc and is well on his way. If he doesn't stop trashing people, he's still at risk of blowing this huge lead. Someone needs to put him in a Twitter 12-Step program. :-)

[cynwoody]

No we don't. We need to "stop arguing" and follow the framers original intent...the meaning at the time.

The Framers were well acquainted with the thoughts of English legal expert Sir William Blackstone on many matters, citizenship among them. Example (boldface added):

When I say, that an alien is one who is born out of the king's dominions, or allegiance, this also must be understood with some restrictions. The common law indeed stood absolutely so; with only a very few exceptions: so that a particular act of parliament became necessary after the restoration, for the naturalization of children of his majesty's English subjects, born in foreign countries during the late troubles. And this maxim of the law proceeded upon a general principle, that every man owes natural allegiance where he is born, and cannot owe two such allegiances, or serve two masters, at once. Yet the children of the king's embassadors born abroad were always held to be natural subjects: for as the father, though in a foreign country, owes not even a local allegiance to the prince to whom he is sent; so, with regard to the son also, he was held (by a kind of postliminium) to be born under the king of England's allegiance, represented by his father, the embassador. To encourage also foreign commerce, it was enacted by statute 25 Edw. III. st. 2. that all children born abroad, provided both their parents were at the time of the birth in allegiance to the king, and the mother had passed the seas by her husband's consent, might inherit as if born in England: and accordingly it hath been so adjudged in behalf of merchants. But by several more modern statutes these restrictions are still farther taken off: so that all children, born out of the king's ligeance, whose fathers were natural-born subjects, are now natural-born subjects themselves, to all intents and purposes, without any exception; unless their said fathers were attainted, or banished beyond sea, for high treason; or were then in the service of a prince at enmity with Great Britain.

The children of aliens, born here in England, are, generally speaking, natural-born subjects, and entitled to all the privileges of such. In which the constitution of France differs from ours; for there, by their jus albinatus, if a child be born of foreign parents, it is an alien.

Admittedly, Blackstone was British, and the colonies were revolting against Britain. But that didn't mean the colonists were going stop speaking English, stop thinking English, or stop adopting English principles as the basis of our law.

When they wrote "natural born citizen", it was with Blackstone's meaning in mind. This is confirmed by the the Naturalization Act of 1790, in which they confirmed Blackstone's definition of NBC. Significantly, the 1790 Act is the last legislative use of the term NBC!

[Godebert]

Note the reference to Natural Law in the first sentence of our Declaration of Independence.

It is crystal clear that the Founding Fathers used the Natural Law definition of 'natural born Citizen' when they wrote Article II. By invoking "The Laws of Nature and Nature's God" the 56 signers of the Declaration incorporated a legal standard of freedom into the forms of government that would follow.

President John Quincy Adams, writing in 1839, looked back at the founding period and recognized the true meaning of the Declaration's reliance on the "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." He observed that the American people's "charter was the Declaration of Independence. Their rights, the natural rights of mankind. Their government, such as should be instituted by the people, under the solemn mutual pledges of perpetual union, founded on the self-evident truth's proclaimed in the Declaration."

The Constitution, Vattel, and “Natural Born Citizen”: What Our Framers Knew

The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God: The True Foundation of American Law

The Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”.

MINOR V. HAPPERSETT IS BINDING PRECEDENT AS TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL DEFINITION OF A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

Neither the 14th Amendment nor Wong Kim Ark make one a Natural Born Citizen

The Harvard Law Review Article Taken Apart Piece by Piece and Utterly Destroyed

Citizenship Terms Used in the U.S. Constitution - The 5 Terms Defined & Some Legal Reference to Same

"The citizenship of no man could be previous to the declaration of independence, and, as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776."....David Ramsay, 1789.

A Dissertation on Manner of Acquiring Character & Privileges of Citizen of U.S.-by David Ramsay-1789

The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law (1758)

The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God: The True Foundation of American Law

Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, Volume 20 - Use of The Law of Nations by the Constitutional Convention

[ROCKLOBSTER]

all children, born out of the king's ligeance, whose fathers were natural-born subjects, are now natural-born subjects themselves

Well there you have it. Cruz's father was Cuban.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

Thank you. Nice collection.