Constitutional Emergency


Wednesday, November 25, 2015

New Hampshire Ballot Access Challenges Against Ted Cruz and Marco R...

New Hampshire Ballot Access Challenges Against Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio Fail for Want of

                                                    By Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
                                                       November 25, 2015

Christopher Booth of Concord, New Hampshire, Cameron Elliott of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and Robert Laity of Tonawanda, New York, filed ballot access challenges in New Hampshire against presidential contenders Senator Ted Cruz and Senator Marco Rubio, arguing that neither of them is an Article II natural born citizen.  The challengers are correct.

Still, the New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission refused to rule on the question of whether the senators are natural born citizens because, chairman Brad Cook said, the issues were not under the panel’s purview.

“Our precedents say we don’t’ go there,” Cook said. “Personally, would I like the U.S. Supreme Court to decide these issues so we know what is, so it doesn’t keep coming up? Absolutely. Are we the vehicle to start that discussion? No, we’re not.”


The Commission refused to rule, basically saying that it does not have jurisdiction over the question of whether Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio are Article II natural born citizens.  It also said that it would like the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on the issue.

On the merits, neither Ted Cruz nor Marco Rubio are natural born citizens.  Neither the original nor amended Constitution defines a natural born citizen.  The unanimous U.S. Supreme Court in Minor v. Happersett (1875) informed that we have to look outside the Constitution for its meaning.  It explained that at common law the nomenclature with which the Framers were familiar when the Constitution was adopted, all children born in a country to parents who were its citizens were "natives, or natural-born citizens," and that under that same common law all the rest of the people were "aliens or foreigners," who could be naturalized if they met the requirements of naturalization Acts of Congress. Minor v. Happersett (1875).

Cruz was neither born in the country, nor was he born to two U.S. citizen parents.  He was born in Canada, presumably to a U.S. citizen mother and a non-U.S. citizen father.  Unlike Senator John McCain, who was born in Panama to two U.S. citizen parents who were there to serve the military interest of the United States, neither of Cruz's parents were in Canada for purposes of serving in the U.S. military.  He therefore does not meet the definition of a natural born citizen.  Cruz is a citizen of the United States at birth only by virtue of a naturalization Act of Congress.  He is therefore not a "natural born citizen" of the United States by virtue of the common law.  A “naturalized born” citizen of the United States is not and cannot be a “natural born” citizen of the United States.

Rubio was born in the country.  But he was not born to two U.S. citizen parents.  He was born in the United States, but to two non-U.S. citizen parents.  Hence, he also does not meet the definition of a natural born citizen.  He is a citizen of the United States at birth only by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment and not by virtue of the common law that provides the only definition of the clause.  He needs the Fourteenth Amendment because, while born in the United States, he was not born to two U.S. citizen parents.  Rubio is a "born citizen" of the United States only by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment.  He is therefore not a "natural born citizen" of the United States by virtue of the common law. Simply being a born citizen of the United States under the Fourteenth Amendment does not make one a natural born citizen of the United States under the common law.
So, neither Cruz nor Rubio are natural born citizens.  It is treason upon the Constitution and the rule of law to see our political institutions kick the can down the road under the guise of want of jurisdiction.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
November 25, 2015
Copyright © 2015
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
All Rights Reserved

Views: 1102

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Absolutely correct, and thank you for weighing in on this issue at this time, Atty. Apuzzo.

Apologists may try to argue something like 'precedent'.  But 'precedent' doesn't matter; nor does any possible change in the working definition of the term.  We are talking about the understanding of the term by the constitutional Framers at the time that it was put in the Constitution for that particular office. (And that particular office ONLY; particularly because the occupant of that office also becomes the Commander in Chief of the nation's military forces, and the Framers did not want anybody with any DUAL OR OTHERWISE CONFLICTING LOYALTIES OR ALLEGIANCES in that office/that position.)  If the eligibility requirement is to be changed, it needs to be changed by a constitutional amendment.


Well said Stan...........apparently the courts or congress does not desire nor have the intellectual depth to understand Framers love for America.

Your Right Henry!!
But when you have what many say is a forged birth certificate, a phoney SSN and your college information is sealed your really don't even need to vet a person to know something is wrong. I think the truth is they know Obama is a fake and a lier yet they refuse to do anything. That's perhaps the greater sin.
John I believe Lee is correct. There is mounting DNA evidence that the great majority of Jews in Isreal today are not descendants of Abraham but are of Askenazim or eastern European decent of the ancient Central European nation of Khazania and converted to Judaisum in 740 A.D.
You might want to check the biblical research websites on the Internet. It is too long of a subject to get into here.

The very fact that we did NOT follow up on the credentials issue in the beginning says we NEED a definitive and Explicit definition of Natural born and never again allow a fraud and freak show like the past 7 years have been. I cast no aspersions on the two candidates being challenged as both are better qualified that the present parasite but the challenge is, utterly necessary and, we currently have appointees the the SJC whom after their pitiful performances during THIS Administration MUST be questioned in so far as their loyalty lies. They seem NOT to use prior precedent as they are supposed to and politicize their decisions based on use of LEGISLATIVE powers they do NOT HAVE under the Constitution; reaching legal decisions based not on law but political agendas by Special Interest Groups. We need to stop appointing Supreme Court Justices for life and have a legal ethics commission of CITIZENS evaluate their performances periodically to insure our country REMAINS ours! I do not trust this government to EVER do anything right for American Citizens and they have PROVEN by performance; actually a major LACK thereof, that they are malfeasant, negligent and unfit as well as incompetent to do anything of a positive nature for the AMERICAN CITIZEN CONSTITUENCIES! It does not help that there is a cabal in BOTH parties that conspires to end constitutional government, the Rule of Law and to eliminate freedom and choice from the lives of ALL Americans.

Hear, hear!

I think you have nailed down several valid points John.........short of Divine intervention, which I doubt since we created the mess, I fear to think of the steps to fix it.............

Brian I agree with you 100%.
It is a natural course of events for those who seek ultimate power and control to disgard the Constitution because our founding documents for they are the very thing that stands in their way from achieving their goals. When our laws are bypassed, rewritten, reinterpreted, when the constitution isn't followed those given the authority to correct these userptions should be held accountable to do their job. I agree all positions should have term limits. There is no earthly reason for lifetime appointments.

I am a 70 year old Vietnam Veteran, disabled by Agent Orange with a 100% disability and I have been sickened by the country we have become since my honorable service with the 199th LIB during the calendar year 1968-1969. Who then, would have thought what has transpired would be possible? I sure didn't and I had a degree in government when I went to Vietnam as an enlisted man by CHOICE though I had 5 years pf military training prior to enlistment. For my last 18 months, I was stationed on the 30 wards at Walter Reed Army Medical Center . We had severely wounded troops; combat traumatic amputees on one side of the corridor and some Congress cretins being cared for and treated for cancer and other maladies. I saw first hand what I considered to be a national disgrace: politicians receiving PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT Over those who had lost vision, hearing, arms. legs sexual function or a combination of all of the above. It sickens me to this day but, I NEVER thought we would have a foreign felon as our supposed leader or see an influx first of uncontrolled and criminal immigration in violation of American Law and then the U.N. assigning us so many "refugees," from Islamic counties when Islam IS the enemy, though the Jihadi in The Oval Office will not recognize them as such: any pragmatic realist with half a brain and common sense, a commodity totally lacking in this edition of Congress

will READILY CONCUR! But, We, The People, are nothing to them and I doubt we are united enough now to end the oppression. Constitutionally, BOTH parties are malfeasant and derelict in duty; likely because so few of them serve in the military themselves and those who have, have been contaminated by the thirst for power and self-aggrandizement. At 70, I feel quite well qualified to make such a determination and I find it comforting after a fashion, that most of my contemporaries , born in the late 30's to the late 50';s of the last century HAVE values that are TRADITIONALLY AMERICAN, while the liberal lunatic left has brainwashed the public educational system with unionized "instructors": few actually TEACH anymore. In addition: the waves of illegals are changing the culture and the society from within and this is NOT ACCIDENTAL, it is part of a conspiracy to destroy this country from within so the U.N. can implement it's infamous Agenda 21. I am concerned for those who will come after but, this is really not my fight anymore and, in any case, I haven't the physical strength to pursue what corrective measures we can. If all elders, members of the Active military, members of the shrinking Middle Class veterans and those who love their freedom would ignore party affiliation and vote out of office EVERY INCUMBENT; we might see a change of heart since the ONLY thing these parasites cherish or wish to retain is their privileged positions. Putting those positions at risk based on their voting records will work as a matter of vested self interest. Better, (in their own eyes,) they comply and listen to the constituencies than lose their jobs for NOT doing so. That is the message that we can send that will be effective IF we are unified enough to exercise it! Not only must we eliminate lifetime appointments, we need to eliminate all CZAR appointments and cut Congressional benefits as well as limiting them to be provided ONLY while they are actively involved in their term limited positions! Let them live as we must as they are NOT better though that is the obvious perception they maintain; that they in fact ARE! If we held them all both RESPONSIBLE and ACCOUNTABLE for their performances; HOW MANY OF THE CRETINS FROM TOP TO BOTTOM WOULD REMAIN IN OFFICE?

i agree with your assessment but your solution will not fly.

following the gentle physical bodily removal of potus / scotus / lawmakers while operating from

command central , all voting / bills / defense contacts / lawmaker pensions will be suspended.

i will stop here as my detailed plan requires a force of the people you identify as patriots

which are not available to me for this mission.

Brian A. Rich,thank you sir for your service and your insight in this matter and I believe your solution is worthy of further evaluation and discussion.

You are most welcome, Lee but I am not sure we have enough integrity and moral conscience as a people to implement a program in which it will be IMPERATIVE that we stand united to accomplish the goal. We used to be a united people with high solidarity but from the initial closing of Ellis Island and the PROPER VETTING of the quotas allowed from specific countries of those attempting to enter here, our society has slowly been deteriorating and values are no longer important; even to many whose posturing says they are when they actions say otherwise. If we are not united and with the strength of character to exercise these ploys, we are doomed to fail before we begin and that is the major worry: Are we still united enough to act in our own behalf and for our own benefit; or are we too converted to universal New World Order Cronyism and willing to surrender all that PRIOR generations of true AMERICAN CITIZENS,  THOSE WITH AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES INHERENT IN AMERCAN CTIZENSHIP, HAVE FOUGHT AND DIED TO PRESERVE FOR THOSE WHO COME AFTER? It is a question with no sure answer as we have had our value system deliberately diluted by our own government and the belief in asking questions frowned upon by those in the Public educational system; non-unionized when I was a child, along with Nursing, Police and Fire positions and when we got REAL educations; we were taught, not indoctrinated as today's kids are and cannot comprehend a different reality as it is all they have ever known and that is not their fault, it is OURS for having failed to hold our own leadership either responsible or accountable to us for the things they have done! I believe what I have proposed can work if it is applied correctly: whether we have enough personnel WILLING to simply VOTE in such a fashion is questionable.



Old Rooster created this Ning Network.

This effort is focused on sacrifice to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.

Fox News

Tech Notes

Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11


1. Click on State Groups tab at the top of the page.
2. Find your State Flag
3. Click on Flag.
4. Look for link to join Your State Group near the top of the State Groups page.
5. Click on it.

Follow the Prompts

How to post "live" URL in posts at PFA............. Adding URLs in blog posts that are not "live" is a waste of everyone's time.....
Here's how....if anyone has better guidance send to me.....
First........type your text entry into the post block to include typing or paste the URL you want us to view........when finished with the text, highlight and copy the URL in the text.......then click the "add hyperlink" tool in the B, I, U box just above the text entry, after clicking, a window will open asking for the URL...paste the URL in the box and click "OK". You have now made the URL "live" shows some code before the post is published, it goes away when you "publish post".......


© 2020   Created by Old Rooster.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service