Constitutional Emergency

MAY TRUTH RULE - I THINK CRUZ IS AN EXCELLENT PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, BUT THE CONSTITUTION MUST BE OBEYED.....APUZZO IS CORRECT.

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
                                                           Jurisdiction

                                                    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.”

http://www.wmur.com/politics/elections-panel-allows-cruz-rubio-to-a...

~~~~~

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
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
####
Copyright © 2015
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
All Rights Reserved

Views: 1073

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

You are correct Luke.........my wording is not clear..........were he eligible, he would be a good candidate.

   This is totally idiotic. We've got someone in the White House that is obviously not a natural born citizen. His father was a citizen of Kenya, so there is no way Obama is constitutionally a natural born citizen. Since Kenya was under British rule at the time of his father's birth, under British law that make Obama a British citizen. Obama has never come up with any legitimate proof that he is even an American citizen of any kind, let alone a natural born citizen. Cruz may have been born in Canada, but that is a lot closer to an American than a Kenyan that is a subject of Great Britain.  Congress and the Supreme Court has allowed that to go on for two illegal terms.

Damn sure didn't seem to matter with obama, did it?

I don't agree with anyone breaking the law, but if you're awake then you know we are WROL now.

WROL means what?

As long as all the corrupt courts and lawmakers refuse to rule on this issue, or continue to say that nobody has 'standing' to bring the issue forward for resolution, then the likes of Kim Jong Il or Hu Jintao could run for President in the U.S. (which is not much better than what we have now). Everyone, including Congress, has abdicated responsibility for deciding whether any candidate is eligible for the office, no matter where he was born or to what country his parents hold allegiance, so now anyone from anywhere can run unimpeded.

I agree Linda..............I'm sure you meant that Kin and Hu would be an improvement over Obama..........

I should have said "not much different than what we have now."  At least the Congress and/or the Military might have been more willing to uphold their oath to rid this country from domestic enemies.  It is still mind-blowing to me that the lust for wealth and power has superseded love of and allegiance to America. Even Iceland, with a population of 1/100th of the U.S., has identified the people who corrupted their country, then arrested and convicted them.  This should have happened in the U.S. long ago, and probably would have had the Global Puppeteers not assassinated JFK and attempted to assassinate Reagan, both of whom were well on their way to exposing the corruption and returning America to its original constitution.

No one has said it better and I have held the same views since my freshman year of college; 1963 when JFK was assassinated and I broached the subject in this manner but was laughed at. Then LBJ ascended to the presidency, used the Guff of Tonkin Resolution to expand ur Vietnam involvement and began the establishment of the Welfare State with the advent of the: "Great Society, "and we have been gradually deteriorating morally, socially, economically, racially, and fiscally EVER SINCE! Then I was an 18 year old; today, I am 70 and a disabled Vietnam Veteran. Had I known then what this country would deteriorate into, I would NEVER have come back to the U.S. but, this is my home and my country and disabled or not: THE OATH I SWORE TO DEFEND AND UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION IS AND ALWAYS WILL BE INCUMBENT ON ME TO HONOR AND COMPLY WITH AS I DID THEN AND WILL NOW, SHOULD THE INEVITABILITY PROVE NECESSARY! I hope it is not inevitable but, I am prepared if it is; and right now, forewarned appears, as always, TO BE THE CORRECT ATTITUDE! I am prepared: I hope all true and loyal AMERICAN CITIZENS, are as well!

Thank you for your service Brian, and for posting your thoughts and ideas. May God continue to bless you with good health and well-being.

Justification for rebellion/ revolution?

The 14th amendment does NOT confer automatic citizenship to anyone.  It was an issue about the slaves who had just recently been given their freedom, and their status as a citizen with their newfound freedom.  You need to go to the LEGAL definition of a U.S. citizen, which is someone who lives within the TEN SQUARE MILES of Washington D.C., or on property owned by the federal government.  Furthermore, the LEGAL definition of "UNITED STATES" is "a federal corporation".  Do your research.  Why does no one running for the office of POTUS tell you these facts?  Because they would be shot, and killed, likely within a week.... or less.  Don't mess with the banksters, and don't mess with the PTB (powers that be) if you enjoy being alive.  Why do you think JFK was assassinated?  Because he was having SILVER CERTIFICATES printed, that's why.  Andrew Jackson was assassinated for the very same reason.  And how many of you still think the Federal Reserve is a federally owned bank?  IT ISN'T.... IT'S A PRIVATE BANKSTER'S CABAL!  When are you folks going to spend some time to educate yourselves?  WHEN?  When the men in black trench coats knock on your door it will be too late!  The PTB want you to believe you are a "patriotic" U.S. citizen because those wonderful "patriotic" U.S. citizens are really nice to us, as they give their hard-earned money to us in the form of taxes. Hahahaha.... we sure fooled them!

Yep, correct, that's why I am a sovereign individual in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and intend to remain as such.

RSS

About

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



HOW TO JOIN YOUR STATE GROUP

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"...........it shows some code before the post is published, it goes away when you "publish post".......

Events

© 2019   Created by Old Rooster.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service