1970 - Ted Cruz is born in Canada, to two parents who had lived in Canada for at least four years at that time, and had applied for and received Canadian citizenship under Canadian Immigration and Naturalization Laws, as stated by Rafael Cruz. As a result, US statutes would have voided the prior "green card" status which requires among other things, permanent residency within the United States and obviously, not becoming a citizen of another country during the time frame of the US green card.

I don't know if that is true or not. But it is undocumented.

The facts are all well documented. You decide...

One who inherits their Citizenship at birth via nature alone, from their natural birth father, is a natural born Citizen of the United States. According to all available information on Ted Cruz and his family, Ted Cruz was a native born citizen of Canada and not a natural born Citizen of the United States. Now, Ted is either not too bright, or not too honest... But he is at least one of the two... and what about the Tea Party leaders behind this legal shell game?

Any Cruzite willing to defend lyin' cheatin' cruz now?

I don't know if that is true or not. But it is undocumented.

politicalconundrum.lefora...Ugh-OhTeds-mom-renounced- citizenship-Ted-born-Cruz

Wee will find out this coming Monday ate the Secretary of States hearing to remove cruz from the NJ ballot.

Wee will find out this coming Monday ate the Secretary of States hearing to remove cruz from the NJ ballot.

I don't think he will be removed. Just being honest with you.

Cruz is not happy, there are four more states, including California.

Cruz is going to jail.

1970 - Ted Cruz is born in Canada, to two parents who had lived in Canada for at least four years at that time, and had applied for and received Canadian citizenship under Canadian Immigration and Naturalization Laws, as stated by Rafael Cruz. As a result, US statutes would have voided the prior "green card" status which requires among other things, permanent residency within the United States and obviously, not becoming a citizen of another country during the time frame of the US green card.

[A K A Stone] I don't know if that is true or not. But it is undocumented.

Nonsense.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/08/ted-cruz-mother-birth-certificate/

“Eleanor was never a citizen of Canada, and she could not have been under the facts or the law. In short, she did not live in Canada long enough to be a Canadian citizen by the time Cruz was born in 1970: Canadian law required 5 years of permanent residence, and she moved to Canada in December 1967—only 3 years before Senator Cruz’s birth.”

Wee will find out this coming Monday ate the Secretary of States hearing to remove cruz from the NJ ballot.

All of the challenges are nonsense.

All of the challenges are nonsense.

Yes sir, we will comply with your orders immediately heir master... < /sarcasm > and < /ridicule>

Cruz knows he perjured himself on his application to the SCOTUS.

Cruz is going to jail.

I've seen it, it is being challenged, remember obama's birth certificates.

I recall over 200 challenges, all worthless and none surviving pre-trial motions. In case you missed it, Obama is still president. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

The Obama goofballs racked up about a quarter-million dollars in sanctions and legal fees they had to pay.

Yes sir, we will comply with your orders immediately heir master...

Don't hold your breath waiting for one of these bogus challenges to succeed.

Cruz doesn't think so, he is fighting them tooth and nail. Got tomorrows put off.

Cruz knows he perjured himself on his application to the SCOTUS.

Cruz is going to jail.

Long on bluster, short on facts, documents, or non-wingnut legal argument.

And just for the record, I am not a Cruz supporter. There is just no valid legal argument against his having become a U.S. citizen at birth.

Wee will find out this coming Monday ate the Secretary of States hearing to remove cruz from the NJ ballot.

Cruz doesn't think so, he is fighting them tooth and nail. Got tomorrows put off.

http://www.northjersey.com/news/ted-cruz-s-nationality-at-center-of-n-j-ballot-hearing-1.1542495

Ted Cruz's nationality at center of N.J. ballot hearing

April 11, 2016, 12:42 PM
Last updated: Monday, April 11, 2016, 7:58 PM

By KIM LUEDDEKE staff writer | The Record

HAMILTON TOWNSHIP – An administrative law judge is expected to rule today on arguments made Monday by a presidential write-in candidate who claims Sen. Ted Cruz is ineligible to run in New Jersey’s presidential primary because he was born in Canada.

Judge Jeff Masin heard arguments by the write-in candidate, Victor Williams, an assistant law professor at the Catholic University of America, and members of a citizens’ group from South Jersey. They contend that Cruz’s birth in Canada means he cannot be a “natural born citizen,” one of three constitutional requirements for the presidency.

Cruz, 45, was born in Calgary, Alberta. His mother was born in Delaware. His father was born in Cuba. The GOP primary candidate has said that a child of a U.S. citizen is automatically granted citizenship at birth and is therefore “natural born.”

On Monday, Victor Williams, the law professor, argued that the framers of the Constitution were deliberate in their wording, including on the issue of eligibility for the presidency.

“They made a decision in Philadelphia that summer to require a couple different soil tests,” Williams said in court. “You’ve got to be a resident on this soil for 14 years. You’ve got to be born on this soil.”

But Masin interjected, arguing that Williams was applying his own interpretation of the phrase “natural born.”

“It doesn’t say, you must be born in the United States,” Masin said about the Constitution. “It would be nice if they did, because then we wouldn’t be here.”

The judge suggested that Williams and the members of the Concerned Citizens of South Jersey, who were represented by attorney Mario Apuzzo, consolidate their cases into one because they each involve the same factual issues.

Shalom D. Stone, a lawyer who represented Cruz, referred the judge to his brief for his arguments in opposition to the challengers. Masin also heard arguments Monday about their standing to challenge Cruz’s eligibility.

Williams, a declared candidate in several states, argues that he should have standing because he is an competitor to Cruz. Judges have rejected several challenges to Cruz’s eligibility to be president because the challengers lack standing. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court last month upheld a trial court decision that ruled Cruz meets the requirement for a natural born citizen.

Masin’s opinion would go to Lieutenant Gov. Kim Guadagno for review in her role as secretary of the state. She has the option to accept the opinion in full or in part, or reject it, according to Apuzzo.

Guadagno was Gov. Chris Christie’s running mate in the 2009 and 2013 elections. Following his failed presidential bid, Christie has come out in support of Cruz’s main challenger, Donald Trump.

Williams said Monday that he supports Trump. At least one of the three South Jersey challengers, Fernando Powers, also said he is a Trump supporter.

Neither Cruz nor Trump has racked up enough delegates to ensure their nomination at the GOP’s convention in July, which could mean that New Jersey’s June 7 primary would be more significant in the outcome than it has in decades. The Republican primary is winner-take-all in New Jersey. The candidate who wins the most votes wins 51 state delegates pledged to vote for him on the convention’s first ballot.

Staff writer Herb Jackson contributed to this report.

https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/california/candce/3:2008cv03836/206145/39/0.pdf?ts=1221601194

Robinson v. Secretary of State Debra Bowen et al, CAND C 08-03836 WHA (2008), Doc 39, at 4:

It is clear that mechanisms exist under the Twelfth Amendment and 3 U.S.C. 15 for any challenge to any candidate to be ventilated when electoral votes are counted, and that the Twentieth Amendment provides guidance regarding how to proceed if a president elect shall have failed to qualify. Issues regarding qualifications for president are quintessentially suited to the foregoing process. Arguments concerning qualifications or lack thereof can be laid before the voting public before the election and, once the election is over, can be raised as objections as the electoral votes are counted in Congress. The members of the Senate and the House of Representatives are well qualified to adjudicate any objections to ballots for allegedly unqualified candidates. Therefore, this order holds that the challenge presented by plaintiff is committed under the Constitution to the electors and the legislative branch, at least in the first instance. Judicial review - if any - should occur only after the electoral and Congressional processes have run their course. Texas v. United States, 523 U.S. 296, 300-02 (1998). This circumstance also obviates any occasion to consider plaintiff’s standing-cure suggestion that the American Independent Party (affiliated with Alan Keyes) be allowed to intervene.

ORDER DENYING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND DISMISSING ACTION by Judge Alsup denying 3 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; granting 27 Motion to Dismiss (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/16/2008)

- - - - - - - - - -

https://www.scribd.com/doc/40107522/KEYES-et-al-v-BOWEN-et-al-3rd-Appellate-District-Court-of-Appeals-Sacramento-Opinion-Affirming-Lower-Court-Decision-in-Full-C062321

KEYES, et al. v BOWEN, et al. (3rd Appellate District Court of Appeals - Sacramento) - Opinion Affirming Lower Court Decision

At 1-2:

Plaintiffs’ contentions lack merit. Among other things, we conclude that the Secretary of State does not have a duty to investigate and determine whether a presidential candidate meets eligibility requirements of the United State Constitution. As we will explain, the presidential nominating process is not subject to each of the 50 states’ election officials independently deciding whether a presidential nominee is qualified, as this could lead to chaotic results. Were the courts of 50 states at liberty to issue injunctions restricting certification of duly-elected presidential electors, the result could be conflicting rulings and delayed transition of power in derogation of statutory and constitutional deadlines. Any investigation of eligibility is best left to each party, which presumably will conduct the appropriate background check or risk that its nominee’s election will be derailed by an objection in Congress, which is authorized to entertain and resolve the validity of objections following the submission of the electoral votes.

At 6:

The trial court sustained both demurrers, ruling the Secretary of State was required to see that state election laws are enforced, but plaintiffs had not identified a state election law imposing a ministerial duty to demand documentary proof of birthplace from presidential candidates.

At 7:

The court also found the petition was moot as to all parties with respect to the 2008 General Election because the Electoral College had voted and Mr. Obama had been inaugurated as President of the United States. It was not ripe as to future elections because the issues were not framed with sufficient concreteness and immediacy to allow the court to render a conclusive and definitive judgment rather than an advisory opinion based on hypothetical facts or speculative future events.

And the court ruled it lacked jurisdiction over the subject of the action in that federal law establishes election procedures and the exclusive means for challenges to the qualifications of the President and Vice President. The appropriate procedure was an action before the United States Congress pursuant to the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Congress and 3 U.S.C. section 15. In the trial court’s words, plaintiffs’ “belief in the importance of their arguments is not sufficient to confer jurisdiction upon this Court.”

- - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - -