Breaking: VT Judge may have to toss Cruz, Rubio off of state's ballot.

[RDM]

Although Bobby Jindal has already dropped out of the race, the 3 Republican contenders for the GOP nomination for President were all originally listed in an eligibility challenge filed in Vermont back in December.

The plaintiff, H. Brooke Paige had previously filed court challenges against the alleged ineligibility of Obama in reference to the natural-born citizen requirement contained in the US Constitution. That case eventually found its way to Vermont's State Supreme Court. According to a report in the Burlington Free Press on October 13, 2013, "The high court ruled 5-0 that Paige’s contention was moot, because Obama won re-election in 2012 and by law is prevented from running for a third term." Paige alleges that the state's Attorney General, William Sorrell, may have played a role in causing that case to be dragged out so long. This time, Paige included Sorrell as a plaintiff both personally and in his official capacity as Vermont's AG in this new lawsuit against Cruz, Rubio and Jindal.

This new lawsuit has been closely followed and reported on at Citizen Wells which appears to be getting direct updates from the plaintiff. After the Secretary of State and Attorney General were duly served on December 11, 2015, they had 20 days in which to file a response to the court which made the deadline December 31, 2015 by close of business at 4:30 pm. According to the latest interesting development reported by Citizen Wells:

Mr. Paige waited until the bailiff came by to lock up the courthouse – no timely response was by A/G Sorrell’s office on behalf of the State, Secretary of State Jim Condos or Attorney General William Sorrell (who is himself named as a co-defendant as a result of his intentional misconduct in Mr. Paige’s prior ballot challenge before the court)

Paige now intends to file a "Notice of Default" to the court on Monday morning. Could we finally see ineligible presidential candidates thrown off a state's primary ballot due to default on an eligibility challenge? The American people by now will not believe it until they actually see it. Let's hope there is finally an inkling of some shred of justice in this matter.
http://www.examiner.com/article/breaking-vt-judge-may-have-to-toss-cruz-rubio-jindal-off-of-state-s-ballot?cid=db_articles

[KEEF]

Good

[Zippyjuan]

Cruz was born in Canada but his mother was a US citizen. Rubio was born in the USA- at the time his parents were permanent legal residents of the U.S. Being born in the US makes him "natural born". They had been in the country legally for fifteen years before he was born and attained full US citizenship four years after his birth.

[notsure]

http://thefederalistpapers.integratedmarket.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/imageedit_84_8470269415.jpg

[jkob]

has this ever worked?

[Jan2017]

Cruz was born in Canada . . .

. . .
Could we finally see ineligible presidential candidates thrown off a state's primary ballot due to default on an eligibility challenge?
. . .


and eventually thrown off the state ballot in the general election, if the GOP were stupid enough to go with a foreign-born candidate on the ticket,
if not determined outright ineligible for the state's electors in the electoral college

[69360]

How stupid is this? Both are beyond any doubt eligible. It will obviously be thrown out.

Birthers. :rolleyes:

[Jan2017]

Cruz will be running in about 45 states if on the GOP ticket . . . good luck with that,
beyond the equivalent of "jury nullification" in USA jurisdictions where he even does get to be considered by the juror-electors.

[notsure]

How stupid is this? Both are beyond any doubt eligible. It will obviously be thrown out.

Birthers. :rolleyes:

You have no idea what you are talking about. There is strong doubt as to the eligibility of both candidates. Especially Ted Cruz. Rubio may have some leeway, depending on people's interpretation of the 14th Amendment. However, Cruz was born on foreign soil and clearly is ineligible.

People trying to insult birthers and Constitutional eligibility :rolleyes:

[notsure]

In 1971, Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, who just 4 years earlier had written the majority opinion in the case of Afroyim v. Rusk, had the following observation to make of foreign-born children of US citizens; “Although those Americans who acquire their citizenship under statutes conferring citizenship on the foreign-born children of citizens are not popularly thought of as naturalized citizens, the use of the word "naturalize" in this way has a considerable constitutional history. Congress is empowered by the Constitution to "establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization," Art. I, 8. Anyone acquiring citizenship solely under the exercise of this power is, constitutionally speaking, a naturalized citizen.”

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/401/815/case.html

[69360]

You have no idea what you are talking about. There is strong doubt as to the eligibility of both candidates. Especially Ted Cruz. Rubio may have some leeway, depending on people's interpretation of the 14th Amendment. However, Cruz was born on foreign soil and clearly is ineligible.

People trying to insult birthers and Constitutional eligibility :rolleyes:

No, there is not a single doubt. This is no different than the Obama birthers. Ineligible is nothing but a masked code word for hating them. This will be thrown out, I would bet every cent I have on it.

[cindy25]

these challenges won't work, but could do damage considering they are time consuming. both Goldwater and George Romney were challenged.

[dude58677]

No, there is not a single doubt. This is no different than the Obama birthers. Ineligible is nothing but a masked code word for hating them. This will be thrown out, I would bet every cent I have on it.

I don't see how it is worth throwing out other than President Smugface putting his thumbs in both ears with his tounge sticking out while he wiggles his fingers.