Posted on 02/20/2016 3:40:26 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
An Illinois judge on Friday said she would decide next month whether she had jurisdiction over a voter's complaint that Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz should not be on the state's primary ballot because he was born in Canada. Lawrence Joyce, a lawyer and pharmacist, filed a complaint in January with the Illinois State Board of Elections saying that under the U.S. Constitution, the Texas senator cannot run for president since he is not a "natural born" citizen. Cruz was born in Calgary, Alberta of a Cuban father and an American mother.
The Board rejected Joyce's complaint - saying Cruz became a natural-born citizen at the moment of his birth because of his mother's citizenship - so he petitioned the Cook County Circuit Court to review that decision.
Circuit Court Judge Maureen Ward Kirby said she was not sure she had jurisdiction, and set a March 1 hearing for arguments on whether to dismiss the complaint.
The complaint comes in the wake of repeated attacks on Cruz about his eligibility by New York businessman and presidential rival Donald Trump....
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Anything to spread FUD. It’s the Demonorat way.
How many judges will the Trumpites seek out? If none will co-operate, will Trumpites go for direct action to rid King Donald of this meddlesome candidate?
Rumor has it the judge is not sure the mother was present when he was born.
That’s called ‘going nowhere fast’ isn’t it?
The US Constitution does not envision the activity called "running for President", and it sets no limits on who may or may not engage in that activity.
Reminds me of the old joke “A polish girl goes home and tells her mother she’s pregnant and the mothers says ‘OMG is it yours?’”
hard to imagine why she would think she lacks jurisdiction
Hopefully Cruz has good security. Unlike Trump and Carson, he doesn’t have a Secret Service detail.
The Trumpites won’t appreciate having their master denied. SS protection or not, one or more of them may well go for the brass ring and seek Trumpist Martyrdom.
Apparently the lawsuit is a complaint involving the US Constitution, and is based on a false belief that the US Constitution sets limits on "running for President", when in fact the US Constitution says nothing about that activity.
the US constitution does set requirements for becoming president. It would seem natural that a federal court could issue a ruling on a candidate’s qualifications in meeting those requirements. But yes, conceivably she could just let him run and then entertain a suit to declare him unqualified only in the event he wins. That, based on the argument that there’s no violation in anybody, qualified or not, just running for the office..... and if people wish to possibly waste their votes, so be it. That’s a very narrow way for her to deal with the complaint, but conceivable yes. We will see. Thanks.
"Standing" is a federal-court concept. Some states follow it but others don't. So this may or may not be an issue under Illinois law.
and, two, Constitutional questions can only be decided at the federal court level.
State courts decide federal constitutional questions every day. Those decisions may ultimately be subject to review in federal court, but, as an initial matter many federal constitutional questions are heard in state courts.
Technically the judge is correct with regards to making any decision with regards to Sen Cruz naturalization status. According to the Constitution, the is EXCLUSIVELY a federal matter (Article 1 Section 8).
The issue is with regards to the State ballot of elections. The judge would have authority over the state ballot. However, to deny a candidate an otherwise qualified entry on that ballot and based exclusively on a citizenship determination would be beyond the jurisdiction of a state court.
“Standing” is a federal-court concept. Some states follow it but others don’t. So this may or may not be an issue under Illinois law.
____________________________________________
It is an issue in the only court system that can decide Constitutional issues.
Perhaps you are being sarcastic. Without a tag, I have to assume that you are not. See post 15 for the jurisdiction issue.
State courts decide federal constitutional questions every day. Those decisions may ultimately be subject to review in federal court, but, as an initial matter many federal constitutional questions are heard in state courts.
__________________________________________
I suppose they can do whatever they want, but their decision isn’t worth the paper its written on.
its in state court, is it?
I see
Clearly understandable, since such a case or controversy has not come up in a looooong time. She is wise to move carefully on this one.
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.