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

Skip to comments.

Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirms Cruz’s eligibility to be president
Dallas Morning News ^ | 03/31/2016 | Elizabeth Koh

Posted on 03/31/2016 12:18:43 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

WASHINGTON – The Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed Sen. Ted Cruz’s slot on the state presidential ballot Thursday, siding with a lower-court ruling that declared the senator is a natural-born citizen.

The court turned away an appeal from Pittsburgh resident Carmon Elliott, who had sued to boot Cruz from the state’s April 26 primary. Elliott had claimed that Cruz’s birth in Canada excluded him from natural-born citizenship — a constitutional requirement for the presidency.

Cruz, who has faced multiple lawsuits on his citizenship status, was born in Canada to an American mother in 1970. He and his lawyers have argued that his mother’s citizenship made him natural born, regardless of the location of his birth.

A Commonwealth Court judge first ruled against Elliott’s lawsuit March 10, declaring that a natural-born citizen “includes any person who is a United States citizen from birth.”

Elliott then appealed the decision to the state Supreme Court, which issued an order Thursday denying his appeal.

At least six other lawsuits against Cruz have been dismissed, though federal cases are pending in Texas and Alabama. Most of the cases that have been tossed so far have been dismissed on procedural grounds, excepting Elliott’s original lawsuit.

(Excerpt) Read more at trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 1stcanadiansenator; canadian; cruzie; globalistcruz; ineligible; naturalborn; noteligiblecruz; openboarderscruz; pennsylvania; tedcruz
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-193 next last
To: wmfights

Trump has nothing to do with Cruz’s eligibility.


21 posted on 03/31/2016 12:34:09 PM PDT by Ray76 (Judge Roy Moore for Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Undecided 2012

What’s phoney about anyone voting there that wants to?

If Cruz folks choose not to vote, what can I do about it.

If a guy is handing out $1000.00 on a sidewalk corner and I decide not to go and get $1000.00, does that make it phoney?

I suggest you look at any night’s totals and match them with the day’s vote. You’ll find every vote accounted for.

Your post was the fraud.


22 posted on 03/31/2016 12:34:12 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Facing Trump nomination inevitability, folks are now openly trying to help Hillary destroy him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Well that settles it!

Except that the ruling is essentially just affirming another ruling that was based on legal arguments from sources which are known by experts in the field to be spurious and/or just plain wrong.


23 posted on 03/31/2016 12:36:33 PM PDT by Yashcheritsiy (You can't have a constitution without a country to go with it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

“Judge Dan Pellegrini relied on articles rather than law and precedent.”

If that is true, it would be a shame.


24 posted on 03/31/2016 12:38:22 PM PDT by ChessExpert (The unemployment rate was 4.5% when Democrats took Congress in 2006.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
The title is misleading. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court refused to accept the petition for the appeal and allow it to be heard. Here is the totality of what it said.

PER CURIAM DECIDED: March 31, 2016 AND NOW , this 31st day of March, 2016, the Order of the Commonwealth Court is hereby AFFIRMED .Victor Williams’s pro se Notice to Intervene as Appellant is DENIED . Appellant’s Application for Oral Argument is DENIED

So once again we see that the matter is a political hot potato in which there will be no effort to decide the merits.

It will be interesting to see if Mr. Elliot tries to go to the SCOTUS and, if he does, what results.

25 posted on 03/31/2016 12:38:53 PM PDT by AmericanVictory (Should we be more like them or they more like we used to be?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Cruz, who has faced multiple lawsuits on his citizenship status

Didn't Trump warn us about all the lawsuits Cruz would face about this issue?

I wonder who got the ball rolling in each state where a lawsuit was filed?

26 posted on 03/31/2016 12:39:07 PM PDT by Slyfox (Donald Trump's First Principle is the Art of the Deal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
I'm not surprised ...

In 2014, the Pa SC deemed it unconstitutional (in PA) to open school board meetings with prayer .... violating the US Constitution's First Amendment right to not be prohibited the free exercise thereof

27 posted on 03/31/2016 12:41:24 PM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericanVictory; All
So once again we see that the matter is a political hot potato in which there will be no effort to decide the merits.

That's the whole point.

On its merits, Ted Cruz is not eligible to be the President of the United states.

However, there is no judge - especially at the state level - who is going to overturn the apple cart and rule ineligible a leading presidential candidate, well into the primaries, and who has been a sitting Senator. This decision is political more than anything else.

28 posted on 03/31/2016 12:42:31 PM PDT by Yashcheritsiy (You can't have a constitution without a country to go with it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Yashcheritsiy

It really is irrelevant what SCOTUS says. No one believes them anyway. They will throw it back to the lower courts unless there are a majority of courts that rule him ineligible.

Can anyone tell us how many courts have ruled Cruz ineligible?


29 posted on 03/31/2016 12:53:13 PM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (United we stand, divided we fall. I think the establishment has divided us enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Quick, someone get Donald some smelling salts.


30 posted on 03/31/2016 12:53:38 PM PDT by VRWCarea51 (The original 1998 version)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yashcheritsiy
Well that settles it! Except that the ruling is essentially just affirming another ruling that was based on legal arguments from sources which are known by experts in the field to be spurious and/or just plain wrong.

Thanks for that. I will use it if there is ever a case against Trump thrown out. Of Course if it involved Donald Trump all would be righteous wouldn't it (......sounds of harps being played in background with a choir singing, accompanied by a very bright light in the distance........)

31 posted on 03/31/2016 12:53:38 PM PDT by VRWCarea51 (The original 1998 version)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

“Trump has nothing to do with Cruz’s eligibility.”

He also had nothing to do with Obama’s eligibility but he didn’t shut up about that either.

I am voting for Trump or Cruz and since my primary is over, I wish the rest of you good luck.


32 posted on 03/31/2016 12:55:13 PM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (United we stand, divided we fall. I think the establishment has divided us enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ChessExpert

Here is Pellegrini’s ruling

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2755257/PA-TedCruzruling.pdf

He relied on law and precedent only in regard to determining if the case is justiciable.

In regard to “natural born citizen” he relies on articles: “A ‘Natural Born Citizen’ Within the Meaning of the Constitution” by Breckinridge Long, “Who can be President of the United States, the Unresolved Enigma” by Charles Gordon, “Qualifications for President and the ‘Natural Born’ Citizenship Eligibility Requirement” by Jack Maskell, “On the Meaning of ‘Natural Born Citizen’” by Paul Clement and Neal Katyal, “Why senator John McCain cannot Be President” by Gabriel Chin, and “Is Gov. George Romney Eligible To Be President” by Isidor Blum.

These articles are not law and precedent.


33 posted on 03/31/2016 12:55:14 PM PDT by Ray76 (Judge Roy Moore for Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Yashcheritsiy

Bingo! (Although I think it’s arguable whether or not Cruz is eligible on the merits.)

I really wish my fellow Trumsters would just drop this issue. It’s is not going anywhere, is a distraction, and makes us look like nutjobs. IT IS NOT HELPING!

It’s also a non-issue. No way Cruz becomes the nominee. He can’t get to the required number of delegates by vote, and the nominee from a brokered convention will be some GOPe puke.

PS After that, a lot of us will simply never vote for a GOPe puke again!


34 posted on 03/31/2016 12:56:04 PM PDT by piytar (http://www.truthrevolt.org/videos/bill-whittle-number-one-bullete)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: piytar

Oh, so Cruz’s eligibility issue is of concern only to Trump voters?


35 posted on 03/31/2016 12:59:22 PM PDT by Ray76 (Judge Roy Moore for Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

I found this...

http://northamericanlawcenter.org/ted-cruz-is-in-the-u-s-senate-illegally/#.Vv09Kk9jln8


36 posted on 03/31/2016 1:00:09 PM PDT by IM2MAD (IM2MAD=Individual Motivated 2 Make A Difference)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Just shows the ignorant state of our judiciary. Cruz’s birth records and his mother’s records are sealed. It is said that she renounced her American citizenship. How can any court declare Cruz eligible in direct violation of the Constitution? Because it is a political game set up by the Democrats and supported by the Republican establishment. Ignoring the constitution will have DIRE CONSEQUENCES.


37 posted on 03/31/2016 1:01:35 PM PDT by Mollypitcher1 (I have not yet begun to fight....John Paul Jones)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

Nah, others are concerned about it, too. I was just speaking about/to the Trumpsters...


38 posted on 03/31/2016 1:04:31 PM PDT by piytar (http://www.truthrevolt.org/videos/bill-whittle-number-one-bullete)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: piytar

I do NOT consider ignoring the Constitution a non-issue! How utterly despicable!


39 posted on 03/31/2016 1:09:40 PM PDT by Mollypitcher1 (I have not yet begun to fight....John Paul Jones)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
What a pathetic 7 time loser Trump is. I hate LOSERS!

Maybe the blustering carnival barker needs to sue himself and become the 8th LOSER.

40 posted on 03/31/2016 1:11:09 PM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-193 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