Posted on 04/08/2016 9:02:58 PM PDT by patlin
BETHESDA, Md., April 8, 2016/PRNewswire/ — Ted Cruz risks primary disqualification in New Jersey resulting from charges of ballot access fraud. A primary ballot disqualification hearing is scheduled by the Secretary of State for Monday, April 11 at 9:00 a.m. in Mercerville, New Jersey.
Washington D.C. Law Professor Victor Williams charges that Ted Cruz fraudulently certified his constitutional eligibility for office to gain ballot access. Williams demands that Cruz be disqualified from several late-primary ballots: “Cruz committed ballot access fraud in each state when he falsely swore that he was a ‘natural born’ American citizen.” Cruz was born in Calgary, Canada and held his resulting Canadian citizenship until May 2014. Cruz is a naturalized (not natural born) American citizen.
(Excerpt) Read more at morningstar.com ...
Settled case law, see Obama 2008.
Have both Houses of Congress passed a new law about who is a NBC, since 2005? Why no, they aren't and you can easily find it, on line and read it for yourself.
Bearing false witness is a sin and you have broken one of the Ten Commandments.
You need to educate yourself on this matter, before calling someone else a liar !
U.S. Supreme Court, Rogers v. Bellei, 401 U.S. 815 (1971)
The central fact in our weighing of the plaintiff's claim to continuing and therefore current United States citizenship is that he was born abroad. He was not born in the United States. He was not naturalized in the United States. And he has not been subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. All this being so, it seems indisputable that the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment has no application to plaintiff Bellei. He simply is not a “Fourteenth Amendment first sentence” citizen. His posture contrasts with that of Mr. Afroyim, who was naturalized in the United States, and with that of Mrs. Schneider, whose citizenship was derivative by her presence here and by her mother's naturalization here.
Page 401 U. S. 828
The plaintiff's claim thus must center in the statutory power of Congress and in the appropriate exercise of that power within the restrictions of any pertinent constitutional provisions other than the Fourteenth Amendment's first sentence.
The reach of congressional power in this area is readily apparent:
1. Over 70 years ago, the Court, in an opinion by Mr. Justice Gray, reviewed and discussed early English statutes relating to rights of inheritance and of citizenship of persons born abroad of parents who were British subjects. United States v. Won Kim Ark, 169 U. S. 649, 169 U. S. 668-671 (1898). The Court concluded that “naturalization by descent” was not a common law concept, but was dependent, instead, upon statutory enactment. The statutes examined were 25 Edw. 3, Stat. 2 (1350); 29 Car. 2, c. 6 (1677); 7 Anne, c. 5, § 3 (1708); 4 Geo. 2, c. 21 (1731); and 13 Geo. 3, c. 21 (1773). Later, Mr. Chief Justice Taft, speaking for a unanimous Court, referred to this “very learned and useful opinion of Mr. Justice Gray,” and observed
“that birth within the limits of the jurisdiction of the Crown, and of the United States, as the successor of the Crown, fixed nationality, and that there could be no change in this rule of law except by statute. . . .”
Because everyone is going to go after Cruz while Hillary walks, and Holder, and Lerner, and....
If you prefer YouTube, look up Teddy's interview, wherein, he, HIMSELF, proffers the exact same answer to the query: "WHO IS A NBC", as I have, as the government study guide has in it, and which is in the Constitution.
You won't like it, but the law is the law, even though Obama got around it.
Please provide the original publication source and a working link to the published material at the site of original publication, each time you post any published material.
Thank you.
Someone does, that much is sure.
Proof reading and cognitive writing skills are your friend.
Maybe. At least there the guns will be pointed outward.
By the time the wall gets built it will be to keep us in, not them out.
Thank you for the correction
It's a shame that you care more about all that, than the Constitution and the law.
Cruz is a fraud and a liar. He has broken a law several times over. Those are facts.
Good catch, but it appears that is not the likely end of the matter.
Bookmark...
The dems and the gope are working together to stop Trump because they KNOW they’ll be able to stop Cruz before the general election.
That is true, but might other courts look to this case and use it to sidestep the whole issue.
Don’t you EVER tire of wasting people’s time with your silly, nonsensical, non NBC BS? Has any court EVER ruled in favor of this idiocy as to POTUS candidates? No, and none ever will.
They are getting their cases on the dockets so that they can do just that. With appeals and such they should have us all in knots right about perfect for their October surprise (NOT).
hillary has a list of courts who are amenable to mucking up the works just in time for November...
you have more faith in the courts than the rest of us.
you may be right.
But the courts are not what they once were... and their makeup and appeal flow can be messed with politically to benefit the powers that be.
This feels different than the birther obama thing. and they are going to try and MAKE it different with the blessing of the media, the GOPe, and Hillary too..
They would not try it, if they did not think it would work.
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.