Posted on 02/03/2016 7:14:58 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is a “natural born citizen” according to the Illinois Board of Elections.
The state’s BOE 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 U.S. 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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been Fourteen Years
a Resident within the United States.”
The board rejected the objections, The Huffington Post first reported. According to HuffPo, Joyce does not plan to appeal the decision due to lack of resources but hopes someone else will.
“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 stated, saying that Cruz “did not have to take any steps or go through a naturalization process at some point after birth,” adding, “Further discussion on this issue is unnecessary.”
Graham also filed a separate challenge to Florida Sen. Marco Rubio ‘s eligibility for the presidency.
New York billionaire and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump whacked Cruz repeatedly over whether the Texas senator qualified to be on the presidential ballot for the last month and urged Cruz to go to the courts to be declared a natural born citizen.
“It’s not anything that’s going to happen, and I’m not going to be taking legal advice anytime soon from Donald Trump,” Cruz said in response to Trump’s accusations at the January 14 Republican debate.
Good news.
Trump and/or Cruz 2016
The Post and Mail is not an ‘irrefutable authority’ !
Sorry, but you have been duped.
They are misciting Vattel.
Vattel later states that a person has a ‘settlement’ and a ‘habitat’. When a child is born, the child has the same citizenship as the parents settlement, not their habitat.
A persons settlement remains the same unless repudiated.
This even a child born abroad, and Vattel uses an ambassador as his example, is a citizen of the parents settlement.
Citizenship by parentage over citizenship by soil.
Ah, they we go... Everybody is corrupt...
Placemark: link to ruling
http://www.elections.state.il.us/Downloads/AboutTheBoard/PDF/02_01_16SOEBAgenda.pdf
Ah, the ‘terrorist can run’ angle.
So can Charles Manson or any other mass murderer born in the USA.
We only have three requirements.
After that, we rely on the prudence of the American citizens.
So, you really think an al-quada terrorist will be able to persuade the American people to vote for him/her?
Not likely.
When we reach that point, we have already lost the country.
“So, you really think an al-quada terrorist will be able to persuade the American people to vote for him/her?”
Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, and Jimmy Carter have all had a role in the infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR into the Whited House, State Department, DoD, FBI, and much more. The Muslim Brotherhood was the organization that aided NAZI war criminals to integrate into the Arab national governments, police, and intelligence services, train, and direct the efforts to exterminate Jews in Israel and elsewhere in the world. The Muslim Brotherhood is behind the writing and publication of the book, The conquest of the West : The Islamists’ Secret Project) by Sylvain Besson, The failure to enforce the natural born citizen clause has already heavily compromised the integrity and security of the U.S. Government.
Ask yourself what can happen in the event the sons of Queen Noor campaign for President of the United States after Cruz or Rubio are not disqualified?
Comparing Cruz to a vile terrorist is beyond despicable !
We have very few requirements to run for President.
For example, we have no exclusion for mass murderers.
Let’s see. What happens if Charles Manson runs for President if Trump is not disqualified?
So STOP YOUR RIDICULOUS NONSENSE.
“Comparing Cruz to a vile terrorist is beyond despicable !”
Then why did you do it by saying we should imagine it so?
“We have very few requirements to run for President.”
“For example, we have no exclusion for mass murderers.”
On the contrary, mass murderers are excluded due to the Constitutional provisions against high crimes and misdemeanors.
“Let’s see. What happens if Charles Manson runs for President if Trump is not disqualified?”
“So STOP YOUR RIDICULOUS NONSENSE.”
You posted the nonsense. The Muslim Brotherhood’s presence in the Whited House and other key departments of the U.S. Government is a matter of public record in the White House logs and media reports. If you permit Ted Cruz to unlawfully occupy the Office of the President, how do you propose to exclude the sons of Queen Noor?
Incorrect child.
The only requirements are:
“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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
And the amendment
“Section 3.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”
The ‘high crimes and misdemeanor’ is for removal of a President for misconduct.
So, how are you going to keep a mass murderer out of the Presidency?
“The ‘high crimes and misdemeanor’ is for removal of a President for misconduct.
So, how are you going to keep a mass murderer out of the Presidency?”
Obviously by arrest, indictment, trial, conviction, and punishment for the crime/s, for example:
Before and inauguration as President of the United States the remedy is in part:
Constitution; Article III. Section. 2. . . . The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.
U.S. Code; Title 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE; Part I - CRIMES; Chapter 50A - GENOCIDE; § 1091 (b) Punishment for Basic Offense.—The punishment for an offense under subsection (a) is—
(1) in the case of an offense under subsection (a)(1), where death results, by death or imprisonment for life and a fine of not more than $1,000,000, or both; and
(2) a fine of not more than $1,000,000 or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both, in any other case.
and after inauguration the remedy is also in part:
Constitution; Article II Section. 4. The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Sorry, not sufficient.
Louisiana just had convicted felon and former Governor Edwin Edwards run for a U.S. House of Representatives position.
He was able to run.
The Constitution allows a convicted felon to run.
“The Constitution allows a convicted felon to run.”
Wrong. You failed to read the information I gave to you. The punishment for such a conviction is death or life imprisonment. The Democrats have not yet found a means of putting a dead person in the White House as President, and they also have not yet taken a person serving a sentence of life imprisonment in there either.
We are not questioning citizen or citizenship.
The matter is about definition as founding fathers put it in (Natural Born Citizen) for eligibility for P and VP to avoid dual allegiance as we see demonstrated by Kenyan.
I read what you provided. It does not apply.
If a convict wants to test the rule, he will be found ‘qualified’ to run.
Try again.
The democrats have already proven that they can run a previously convicted felon - Edwin Edwards.
It is only a matter of time until they try a life time convict.
“The democrats have already proven that they can run a previously convicted felon - Edwin Edwards.”
Unfortunately there is no law prohibiting the election of a former felon to serve in the House of Representatives or the Senate. Nonetheless, there is a law prohibiting the election of a felon to the other public offices.
“It is only a matter of time until they try a life time convict.”
Trying does not make the attempt any less unconstitutional.
“I read what you provided. It does not apply.”
Your baseless denial of the obvious fact that a dead felon and mass murderer cannot serve as President is nonsensical. Your baseless denial of the obvious fact that a felon and mass murderer serving a life sentence cannot lawfully serve as President is nonsensical.
“If a convict wants to test the rule, he will be found ‘qualified’ to run.”
Even if that wee to occur, its occurrence would do nothing to change the fact the Constitution and its subsidiary laws prohibited and made unlawful doing so.
I see you cannot handle the truth. Sad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.