Posted on 03/10/2016 9:12:47 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
HARRISBURG -- Carmon Elliott is not a lawyer. But he got to play one Thursday in state court when he tried to convince a judge that Republican U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz is really a Canadian who has no constitutional right to be a candidate for U.S. president.
Senior Judge Dan Pellegrini of Commonwealth Court was as impressed with Elliott's oral arguments as he was his Uncle Sam tie.
"By the way, I like your tie," said Pellegrini, who's known for his wit as well as his probing legal questions.
Some judges don't like hearing election petition cases argued by pro se litigants because they can be unprepared and disruptive to the political process, Pellegrini said. Not so in Elliott's case.
"I have to compliment you," Pellegrini said in court. "You represented yourself well today."
Elliott, a retiree who lives in Pittsburgh and is a Republican with a self-professed affinity for the U.S. Constitution, went up against Robert N. Feltoon, a lawyer from the Philadelphia firm Conrad O'Brien.
Feltoon argued that Elliott's petition should be dismissed. The U.S. Supreme Court has never specifically ruled on whether a person born outside the United States as Cruz was can run for president, he argued. It is a decision, Feltoon said, that should be made by Congress and the Electoral College, which ultimately elects the president.
Elliott's petition was one of several "birther" lawsuits filed against Cruz after GOP front-runner Donald Trump openly questioned whether the Texas senator can serve as president.
An Illinois judge tossed one lawsuit last week....
(Excerpt) Read more at mcall.com ...
Thank you. So, when those cases get decided in the other states, please let me know what those judges say. From what I read in the order, I do not understand why Cruz contested standing. I don’t see why he would not just prefer to go ahead and get a decision and remove any possible impediments. Sometimes lawyers try to do things to keep their client out of the court, but Cruz seems to have a good case, so I don’t know why they didn’t just tee it up and see where the ball landed. What some lawyers will do!
It will be dismissed Just like the other three!!!
Florida, Illinois, and New York!!! Three strikes your outa there!!!
>>> Huh? The citizen parent in all three cases, the prince, Obama, and Cruz, in all three cases, the citizen parent is the mother.
yeah... and the fact that everyone seems to be arguing about this and nobody can settle it just shows you just how far America has already been sold out.
Because Cruz knows what the Constitution says & IMO, he is also hiding damaging info regarding his mother's legal status in Canada at the time of his birth and shortly thereafter. As for the other cases, unless those bringing them use the critical part of the WKA case as well as Justice Gray's deciding opinion in the Elk v. Wilkins case that cites the Slaughterhouse & Happersett cases, none of the ongoing cases stand a chance to win. The 14th is clear, born “IN” & naturalized “IN” the United States and both “subject tot he jurisdiction”. Well, if jurisdiction merely means birth on soil, that phrase is redundant. Jurisdiction means both politically as well as physically on the soil so that one owes no allegiance to any foreign power (a.k.a. foreign citizenship).
You’re probably right. Good reason Cruz had his records sealed.
Perhaps he was hiding something, but we will see when the other cases get decided. Any idea what the timeline on them is? Because if Trump has the nomination before that, then those cases may get dismissed.
I wonder if Trump knows that the “thumbs up sign” is an insult in Iran, Iraq, Syria, and other Middle-Eastern countries. The equivalent of the middle finger in America.
I’m guessing he does.
Nope they’ll wait until after the general election if they lose. At least 1 Congressman and 1 Senator will challenge Cruz’s eligibility.
Cruz will Loze!
I wouldn’t vote for a dog-catcher who thought it was OK to kill babies. I’d keep them out of any position in government. It’s a monstrosity and the only reason the modern generation can push it aside so easily is they’ve forgotten the horror of it in the eyes of God. I just hope God has mercy on us and leads us out of the nightmare before we come under irreversible judgment. So don’t lecture me about God’s citizenship laws for Israel whilst you embrace someone who sanctions murder.
Peace,
SR
The Norwalk Hour newspaper - Wed, June 14, 1967
Reagan Gets Bill Easing Abortion In California
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP)
—The California Assembly has
passed and sent to Gov. Ronald
Reagan, a bill easing the state’s
abortion law — unchanged in 95
years.
Reagan said the bill was “by
no means perfect” and would
have to be watched closely to
prevent California from becoming
an abortion haven. But he
said he would sign it despite his
doubts about some possible
“loopholes”.
“I am fully sympathetic with
attempts to liberalize the outdated
abortion law now on the
law books of California.” the
freshman Republican governor
said.
The bipartisan vote Tuesday
and Reagan’s pledge climaxed
the most controversial and emotional
debate so far in the 1967
legislative session.
Colorado and North Carolina
have passed similar laws earlier
this year and both now are
in effect. Colorado’s previous
statute was nearly a century old
and North Carolina’s dated back
to 1868.
The bill, sponsored by Sen.
Anthony C. Beilenson, a Beverly
Hills Democrat, would permit
abortions before the 20th week
of pregnancy if:
—The prospective mothers’s
physical or mental health is in
danger.
—The pregnancy resulted
from incest or forcible rape, or
statutory rape in the case of a
girl 14 years old or younger.
The old law permits abortions
only if the life of the prospective
mother is endangered.
Article from the Google Newspaper Archive
https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=yAlJAAAAIBAJ&sjid=dAUNAAAAIBAJ&pg=5620%2C3433380
Name one court where Cruz NBC status has been decided, please.
Sorry it is Both!
More importantly as you suggest it is the parentage that is most important. NBC is like a human pedigree,
A puppy born to a poodle mom and poodle dad is a poodle!
A puppy born to a poodle mom and a beagle dad is a mongrel.
Ted Cruz is like the latter. He has elements of both parent’s citizenship. He is not 100% American. He is Cuban-American, or, if you like, American-Cuban.
The Founders intended the NBC clause of Article II to be exclusionary. It was intended to weed out those who were not 100% American....
.....Born in a country to parents who are it’s citizens.....
If Cruz were a Canine we’d all call him a mutt......
Just as the poodle-beagle is ineligible for competing in an AKC Show
so is
Cruz ineligible for running for the Office of the President of the US.
Yep, I know all about that, also that he came to regret it, and that eventually he came to support full personhood for the unborn. If I knew then what I know now, I would not have supported him until after his change. I’ve grown too. We make regrettable mistakes when we are young. That doesn’t make it right, or give us an excuse to keep making the same mistake.
Peace,
SR
You’re missing the point.
Citizenship isn’t the issue.
Quality of citizenship is.
Only persons born on the US to US citizen parents are eligible for the Office of the President. NBCs are 100% American (quality). No questions asked. This is the only place in US Law where being a NBC is relevant. All other elected offices in the Federal Government require only citizenship.
The Founders were wise. Follow the Constitution.
In the early 1800’s Congress did try to codeify NBC but the SC struck it down as unconstitutional. They needed an amendment. But after Barky and Juan it just probably doesn’t matter anymore.
The USSC has defined Natural Born Citizenship many times in cases involving citizenship. It has always held that a NBC is a person born in a country to parents who are it’s citizens......NBC is the Gold Standard of citizenship. Shame on those of you who are attempting to redefine that down in order to promote the political agenda of electing an ineligible candidate......Obama Cruz, Rubio....
Until Trump gets the nomination, we need a seeming viable second who also happens to be the most conservative of the bunch - makes no sense to write him off at this stage even if his battle seems uphill.
The one key word everyone works so hard to hide is that natural born citizenship is passed on ONLY when the child is of TWO (TWO, TWO, TWO, TWO, TWO, TWO, TWO, TWO, TWO, 2, 2, 2, 2,) parentS (SSSSSSSSSS) that where BOTH US citizens at the time of the child's birth. One doesn't cut it.
You will be a child of natural birth and US citizenship conferred upon the child and not having to go through all the naturalization processes if you are born of one US citizen parent. But you are not a natural born citizen, just a US citizen that endured a natural birth. There is a difference. Words mean things when the law gets involved instead of politics and imagery, hopes and wishes, a wink and a nod.
Ted Cruz destroying the meaning of our constitution to further his political career. While all the so called “principled conservatives” cheer him on.
Yes obviously the founders would consider the son of a Cuban born in Canada a natural born American citizen. /s
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.