Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Trump supporters file 'birther' lawsuit against Cruz in federal court
The Hill ^ | 02/12/2016 | Bradford Richardson

Posted on 02/12/2016 11:22:56 AM PST by GIdget2004

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-298 next last
To: smoothsailing
One thing is becoming more evident with each passing day. Ted Cruz is a natural born jackass.

For sure. Just yesterday I heard that he called Trump a liar. Can you imagine?

Oops. That was a Trump quote about Cruz. Sorry about that.

41 posted on 02/12/2016 11:36:28 AM PST by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: hoosiermama
Just making notes -- this suit was filed in Alabama. First such suit vs. Cruz in that state. I don't know if Obama was ever sued in Alabama, or any of the courts in the 11th Circuit (Alabama, Georgia, Florida).

Suit comes out of a law office, not some pro se filing.

Plaintiff says that a birth abroad in military service is not a naturalized birth. The 5th Circuit (at least) says otherwise. Not pertinent for Cruz, probably tossed in the misleading statement to get some sort of "sympathy" from the public and/or the judge, that an adverse ruling against Cruz doesn't affect citizenship status of children born to military servicemen/women abroad.

Haven't got a case number or a link to the complaint yet. US news outlets are pathetic wastes when it comes to making facts available.

42 posted on 02/12/2016 11:36:38 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest
It doesn't matter.

Trumpites will do the bidding of their master, spoken or unspoken.

43 posted on 02/12/2016 11:38:10 AM PST by Thumper1960 (Cruz/Palin2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: dartuser

“Cruzers are not going to like this ... but it should settle the issue once and for all either way.”

I totally agree. Take the issue away once and for all. This way Ted would be free to run as Trumps VP.


44 posted on 02/12/2016 11:38:17 AM PST by Parley Baer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: HarleyLady27

Perhaps this group will have ‘standing’ A note to our Founding Fathers, the wise men who wrote our sacred documents. Why sirs, did you not foresee this and give US insight on exactly how to keep the pigs in the fence? There needs to be something written in black and white otherwise years from now the radicals will attempt to do this all over again. They keep running those plays till they get it right -Their win; our loss


45 posted on 02/12/2016 11:38:34 AM PST by V K Lee (u TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP to TRIUMPH Follow the lead MAKE AMERICA GREAT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

“Good! Let’s get it over.”

It won’t matter. we’ll continue to see the birther opinions on the internet for years to come.


46 posted on 02/12/2016 11:39:29 AM PST by Durbin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomjusticeruleoflaw
Read the CONSTITUTION, LIBERAL !
IT'S THE LAW !
So there is the law for the time Ted Cruz was born,
AND HOW Ted Cruz's PARENTS fulfilled ALL those requirements of the law that time, for Ted Cruz to be a "Natural Born Citizen".
Ted Cruz did NOT NEED a Court and a Judge to "Nationalize" him. One more thing, listen to a REAL CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYER:
47 posted on 02/12/2016 11:39:32 AM PST by Yosemitest (It's SIMPLE ! ... Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

After the Kenyan in office this subject is null aND void..


48 posted on 02/12/2016 11:39:53 AM PST by longfellow (Bill Maher, the 21st hijacker.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dartuser
-- Why would a voter who wants to cast a vote for a legal candidate not have standing? --

The courts reason that your tentative vote can't be viewed as having any value, that the person you object to might lose anyway, in which case, you have no damages at all.

The better line of attack in these suits is ballot integrity. It is a crime in all states to file falsely. There is a good argument that Cruz has broken the law by certifying that he is eligible.

49 posted on 02/12/2016 11:39:58 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest
Gosh, your fingers could get messed up from all that CTRL C and CTRL V usage.


50 posted on 02/12/2016 11:41:41 AM PST by fireman15 (Check your facts before making ignorant statements.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: V K Lee
They should have NEVER done this with obuma, it set the wrong example, but people were soooo excited to have a Black President, they let it slide...

We have a lot of Black, well educated, Born On American Soil, to two born on American soil parents that could very well have been President...but they chose not to use reason and now we are back here again...

Just because some people made an error in bad judgment on obuma doesn't mean we have to do it again...

51 posted on 02/12/2016 11:42:43 AM PST by HarleyLady27 ("The Force Awakens"!!! TRUMP;TRUMP;TRUMP;TRUMP!!! 100%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: baxtelf

Standing is based on damage. Since he is not in office yet they can’t claim damage for actions yet to happen. Thus far the only people with standing are fellow candidates. Dr Carson has been damaged the most with the dirty trick et al


52 posted on 02/12/2016 11:42:49 AM PST by hoosiermama (Make America Great Again by uniting Great Americans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004
Yawn!

Can't wait to see what opening up the Trump Pandora's Box will uncover, that we don't yet know

53 posted on 02/12/2016 11:43:18 AM PST by zerosix (Native Sunflower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fireman15
Unless Trump himself, or one of the other candidates joins in... it will be found that they have “no standing” and be dismissed regardless of the merits.

Ben Carson might join.

54 posted on 02/12/2016 11:43:20 AM PST by Kenny (RED)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: hoosiermama
I'm not even sure an opposing candidate has standing. A court can say that the candidate in opposition can't win anyway.

But as I said before, courts are funny things. There is ALWAYS a way to get to the desired result. The "law in between" is just a tool, it leads to no definite conclusion. In the hands of a judge, the law is infinitely malleable.

55 posted on 02/12/2016 11:44:09 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

The courts will find on the following:

(a) The complainants have no standing with out the full consent of the Republican Party in the motion. The party provides ^bona fides^ of the candidates eligibility.

(b) After that, the question of standing is directed to [first] the electoral college and [second] the house of representatives.

Under the current understanding of the courts, no individual voter has standing in the question of eligibility.


56 posted on 02/12/2016 11:44:34 AM PST by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alterations: The acronym defines the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kenny

I think your on to something here, he is a candidate, and he could bring action on this subject....


57 posted on 02/12/2016 11:45:03 AM PST by HarleyLady27 ("The Force Awakens"!!! TRUMP;TRUMP;TRUMP;TRUMP!!! 100%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

Trump has his own issues if he really has British citizenship himself.


58 posted on 02/12/2016 11:45:43 AM PST by Maelstrom (To prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the Constitution:The Bill of Rights limits government power)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justlittleoleme

The Illinois election commision’s “Further discussion on this issue is unnecessary.” is pretty funny, in as much as it didn’t have a discusison in the first place. The commision said ZERO words of rebuttal to the opposition argument.


59 posted on 02/12/2016 11:45:48 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Interesting.


60 posted on 02/12/2016 11:46:02 AM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-298 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson