N.J. ballot challenge

User avatar
bob
Posts: 23808
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

N.J. ballot challenge

#1

Post by bob » Sat Apr 09, 2016 12:09 pm

Victor Williams (the law professor, presidential candidate, and failed intervenor in the SCoPA case) filed a ballot challenge in New Jersey.

The documents at the link imply there will be a hearing on April 11, as does Williams' presser.*


In related news, someone :- has been trolling Apuzzo to see if he can be bothered to stop obsessively commenting, and will file something in the real world.


* According to Williams' presser, he filed challenges in California, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Washington and Wisconsin.


Imagex5 Imagex2 Imagex3 Imagex2

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43493
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#2

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat Apr 09, 2016 12:38 pm

Williams is a clinical assistant professor of law, not very impressive academically for someone who's been teaching for a quarter of a century. His briefs demonstrate why he is still an assistant professor (and a "clinical" professor means he is on the practicing not the academic side of things, so the pressure to publish is not as great). The attached brief was in the Canning case (involving the President's recess appointment powers). It takes an "idiosyncratic view" of the right to judicial review of the NLRB appointments.

He sounds a lot like Orly Taitz according to this article:
Washington D.C. Law Professor Victor Williams charges that Ted Cruz fraudulently certified his constitutional eligibility for office to gain ballot access. Williams demands that Cruz be disqualified from several late-primary ballots: "Cruz committed ballot access fraud in each state when he falsely swore that he was a 'natural born' American citizen." Cruz was born in Calgary, Canada and held his resulting Canadian citizenship until May 2014. Cruz is a naturalized (not natural born) American citizen.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 23808
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#3

Post by bob » Sun Apr 10, 2016 2:06 pm

P&E: Exclusive: Write-In Republican Presidential Candidate Files Ballot Challenges Against “Ted ‘Canadian’ Cruz,” Hearing on Monday Morning in New Jersey:
“A FRAUDULENT CAMPAIGN”

* * *

“George Mason has just received a very generous gift and they have renamed their law school the “Antonin Scalia School of Law,” so retroactively I have a degree from there, which I’m very happy about,” Williams told The Post & Email on Saturday morning. “It’s a perfectly-named university and now a perfectly-named law school.”

In addition to Catholic University, he has taught law at City University of New York’s John Jay College of Criminal Justice. He also holds two Master’s degrees, one of which is from Harvard University.

* * *

In an exclusive interview on Saturday, Williams told The Post & Email that Cruz’s filing deadline in New Jersey was April 4, on which day the Cruz campaign filed the necessary documents. However, Williams reported that Cruz’s name has not yet been placed on the state ballot. He said that of the “half-dozen or so” challenges filed against Cruz’s candidacy on the same grounds in various states, he believes that unlike the plaintiffs in those cases, he can transcend the issue of “standing” as a registered Republican write-in candidate. . . .
Williams wrote:They have been summarily dismissed on the procedural issue of “standing.” When a voter says, “This injures me,” the courts have said, “That’s not sufficient injury for ‘standing.’ I looked at the situation and asked, “Who would have standing, to go to the court and stand at the bar of the court and say, “I’ve been injured”? The best research I was able to do showed that the party who would have the absolutely best standing is a “competitor candidate” of Mr. Cruz. It’s been recognized in any number of state and federal courts.

I thought to myself, “None of Mr. Cruz’s opponents who have left the field have had the courage or personal initiative to file a lawsuit; I don’t think that either Mr. Trump or Mr. Kasich is going to do that. So is there some way that I could make myself a competitor? I looked at the filing deadlines and realized that I didn’t have the resources or the time to get on the ballot in any of these states, but I did find that I could still, in mid-March, make myself a write-in candidate in at least nine states. So I immediately did that.

For some of the states, it was quite high-pressure. There was a specific form that had to be used; it had to be notarized; I had to take an oath; I had to file it with the Secretary of State in a very formal way by a certain deadline. But that’s good, because that means that the state has to be in correspondence with me by sending me a letter saying, “We’ve received this; you are now officially a write-in candidate. You will not appear on the ballot, but you are formally registered as a candidate.” I was able to do that in a number of later-primary states.

So that’s the basis. In New Jersey, as soon as I was registered as a write-in candidate, I immediately filed a challenge petition asking that Mr. Cruz not be allowed on the ballot. The filing deadline for candidates in New Jersey was April 4, so I had an opposition waiting for Mr. Cruz when he filed his petition that day. It’s very interesting; in New Jersey, in addition to the signatures – and it’s a somewhat low bar with 1,000 signatures required – you are required to formally sign a certificate attesting that you meet the constitutional qualifications for the office, for every office.

Mr. Cruz submitted his 1,000 signatures, and on top of that signature petition, he signed a certificate saying that he is constitutionally qualified.
* * *

In addition to filing ballot challenges, Williams stated that he has “warned each Secretary of State in the nine (9) states where he has lodged Ballot Disqualification Challenges against Ted Cruz that they will be held legally and politically responsible for knowingly disenfranchising their state’s citizens by allowing them to throw their vote away on an illegitimate candidate.” :roll:

The Post & Email’s interview with Williams will be continued in an additional article to be published soon.
Oh:
Monday’s hearing will take place at:

Office Of Administrative Law
3444 Quakerbridge Road
Quakerbridge Plaza-Bldg.9
Mercerville (Hamilton Twp.), New Jersey 08619
Sekrit Stuffs!
30 minutes from Apuzzo's basement!


Imagex5 Imagex2 Imagex3 Imagex2

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43493
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#4

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sun Apr 10, 2016 3:14 pm

His challenge is as impressive as his academic qualifications.
► Show Spoiler



User avatar
everalm
Posts: 1885
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 9:45 am

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#5

Post by everalm » Mon Apr 11, 2016 6:19 am

Yay….

Falio the Putz in’a house…..!

Yes, ’tis true not having learned anything in Purpura and the threat of sanctions, Mario has, it seems kinda returned to the fray.

According to other serial muppet “Cmdr” Kerchner, Falio is

https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2016/ ... y-hearing/

Breaking News: Constitutional Article II Expert Attorney Mario Apuzzo will Represent Objector Fernando Powers at Canadian-Born Ted Cruz NJ Eligibility Hearing to be Held on Monday, 11 Apr 2016, at 9:00 a.m. EDT in Mercerville NJ.

Fortunately for Falio this is not in court but at the “Office Of Administrative Law” so the probability of summary sanctions for filing a frivolous lawsuit are alas probably off the table.

Still, one could hope…….



User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 14652
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#6

Post by Reality Check » Mon Apr 11, 2016 7:19 am

:pray: Please let there be video.


"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34381
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#7

Post by realist » Mon Apr 11, 2016 7:25 am

Reality Check wrote::pray: Please let their be video.
:like:


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
bob
Posts: 23808
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#8

Post by bob » Mon Apr 11, 2016 4:44 pm

ALJ to rule tomorrow.

And it Apuzzo's favorite ALJ, Masin! :thumbs:


http://www.northjersey.com/news/ted-cru ... -1.1542495


Imagex5 Imagex2 Imagex3 Imagex2

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34381
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#9

Post by realist » Mon Apr 11, 2016 4:55 pm

bob wrote:ALJ to rule tomorrow.

And it Apuzzo's favorite ALJ, Masin! :thumbs:


http://www.northjersey.com/news/ted-cru ... -1.1542495
:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

No motion to recuse yet? Or is he not going to do that so he'll have yet another excuse for his BIG WIN!! :lol:


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43493
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#10

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Mon Apr 11, 2016 5:11 pm

Cruz's ineligibility presents a serious issue. But Blovario is sufficiently creative to make a frivolous and sanctionable argument if his past conduct is any guide. Especially if he launched into the two parent bullshit.



User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 9710
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#11

Post by Notorial Dissent » Mon Apr 11, 2016 6:18 pm

Unless the skunk changed its stripes, he undoubtedly made the same, losing, arguments he has made every other time he's had a chance to screw up a case. Originality or deep thought is not within his repertoire, at least not that he has shown any time in my remembering. Is there any indication that he even got to dip his oar in the water?


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 23808
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#12

Post by bob » Tue Apr 12, 2016 12:58 pm

P&E interviews Apuzzo: http://www.thepostemail.com/2016/04/11/ ... e-hearing/

My takeaways:

1. Cruz's attorney argued that the challengers have the burden of proof, which is essentially what the ALJ ruled four years ago. Apuzzo refuses to concede that the challengers have the burden of proof, and JAQed off about Cruz's mother's citizenship. :roll:

2. Cruz's lawyer has a killer 2.5-page footnote listing every birthers case dismissed for lack of standing. But Apuzzo assured the ALJ none of those cases are relevant.

3. Even with Rondeau's softballs, Apuzzo still sounds like an idiot.


Imagex5 Imagex2 Imagex3 Imagex2

User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 5709
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#13

Post by Sam the Centipede » Tue Apr 12, 2016 1:32 pm

bob wrote:P&E interviews Apuzzo: http://www.thepostemail.com/2016/04/11/ ... e-hearing/

My takeaways:

1. Cruz's attorney argued that the challengers have the burden of proof, which is essentially what the ALJ ruled four years ago. Apuzzo refuses to concede that the challengers have the burden of proof, and JAQed off about Cruz's mother's citizenship. :roll:

2. Cruz's lawyer has a killer 2.5-page footnote listing every birthers case dismissed for lack of standing. But Apuzzo assured the ALJ none of those cases are relevant.

3. Even with Rondeau's softballs, Apuzzo still sounds like an idiot.
Has Apuzzo evah sounded like anything other than an idiot?

It is funny to read the Post & Efail commentariat fawning and slavering after Mario, who probably looks slightly competent to their pathetic, deluded brainlets.



TexasFilly
Posts: 17570
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#14

Post by TexasFilly » Tue Apr 12, 2016 1:40 pm

bob wrote:P&E interviews Apuzzo: http://www.thepostemail.com/2016/04/11/ ... e-hearing/

My takeaways:

1. Cruz's attorney argued that the challengers have the burden of proof, which is essentially what the ALJ ruled four years ago. Apuzzo refuses to concede that the challengers have the burden of proof, and JAQed off about Cruz's mother's citizenship. :roll:

2. Cruz's lawyer has a killer 2.5-page footnote listing every birthers case dismissed for lack of standing. But Apuzzo assured the ALJ none of those cases are relevant.

3. Even with Rondeau's softballs, Apuzzo still sounds like an idiot.
What? You think "there are rumors that" is not a good argument at a hearing? :rotflmao:


I love the poorly educated!!!

I believe Anita Hill!

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43493
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#15

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Tue Apr 12, 2016 3:12 pm

Here's Apuzzo's brief. Restrained but still awful.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 23808
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#16

Post by bob » Tue Apr 12, 2016 7:29 pm

New Jersey keeps Cruz on the ballot: http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/christin ... t-n2147656


Imagex5 Imagex2 Imagex3 Imagex2

Mr. Gneiss
Posts: 1541
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 12:37 am

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#17

Post by Mr. Gneiss » Tue Apr 12, 2016 7:42 pm

bob wrote:New Jersey keeps Cruz on the ballot: http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/christin ... t-n2147656
Mario wins again. :rotflmao: :rotflmao:



User avatar
bob
Posts: 23808
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#18

Post by bob » Tue Apr 12, 2016 8:42 pm



Imagex5 Imagex2 Imagex3 Imagex2

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 14652
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#19

Post by Reality Check » Tue Apr 12, 2016 10:00 pm

Judge Masin's thoughtful ruling is an excellent summary of the issues concerning the eligibility of foreign born US citizens at birth.


"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
everalm
Posts: 1885
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 9:45 am

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#20

Post by everalm » Wed Apr 13, 2016 3:37 am

Well paint me green and call me Aunt Jemimah....that's a bit of a turn up for the books....

Based on past history I was pretty sure this would be bounced on standing grounds and/or non justiciable due to the SoS restriction on authority to rule on eligibility.

Still doesn't help the Birthers....wonder if they are going to attempt an appeal....?

I see more popcorn in my near future.... :popcorn:



User avatar
everalm
Posts: 1885
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 9:45 am

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#21

Post by everalm » Wed Apr 13, 2016 4:20 am

H'mm, on further reading of the judges ruling I am less sanguine about some of his reasoning.

On page 4 he outright dismisses both the Electoral College and Congress as having authority or ability to rule on eligibility. He completely skates over the process by which an objection can be raised and Congress can vote as an example.

Then in page 5 he states that he (as in the judiciary) and the state SoS DO HAVE the right and authority to opine and rule on presidential eligibility.

I did note a particularly useful cite I haven't seen noted previously which is a swift kick in the gut to the "2 parent" Birthers. On page 12 he notes, whilst citing 'Smith v Alabama' and 'Wisconsin v Pelican Ins. Co'

The authors find that these sources confirm their conclusion that the phrase “includes persons born abroad who are citizens from birth based on the citizenship of a parent.” (emphasis added)

As, quoting Judge Pellegrini he skewers the whole nonsensical "Yabbut there's a mystical seekrit type of citizen which is 'statutory' at birth abut not an NBC" regularly quoted by BSE and Kerchner

Having extensively reviewed all articles cited in this opinion, as well as
many others, this Court holds, consistent with the common law precedent
and statutory history, that a “natural born citizen” includes any person who
is a United States citizen from birth.”
(emphasis added)

All in all an interesting read......



User avatar
bob
Posts: 23808
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#22

Post by bob » Wed Apr 13, 2016 5:57 pm

Apuzzo's "appeal" to LGoNJ:

Williams' "appeal":


Imagex5 Imagex2 Imagex3 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 23808
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: N.J. ballot challenge

#23

Post by bob » Thu Apr 14, 2016 2:55 am

Apuzzo (and Williams) wins again: LGoNJ adopts ALJ's recommendation.


Imagex5 Imagex2 Imagex3 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 23808
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: N.J. ballot challenge

#24

Post by bob » Thu Apr 14, 2016 3:00 am

The Excess of Democracy blog has two posts that are rather critical of the ALJ's reasoning.

And, just for fun, a Ted Cruz citizenship quiz.


Imagex5 Imagex2 Imagex3 Imagex2

User avatar
everalm
Posts: 1885
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 9:45 am

Re: N.J. ballot challenge (hearing Apr. 11)

#25

Post by everalm » Thu Apr 14, 2016 5:36 am

bob wrote:Apuzzo's "appeal" to LGoNJ:

Williams' "appeal":
Tut, tut as some purported legal beagle, one would have assumed that Mr Williams wouldn't have done a Taitz and have two "objections the 6th" although for symmetry both are on the 6th page as well...

Oh and he would have spelled "Fourth" correctly and actually bolded both his 6th's not just one

Or whining that "Williams has imminent, concrete and, particularized injuries by New Jersey" which is IIRC a standing objection....when he was GRANTED standing.... (not to mention too many comma's).....

And so on and so forth ( not fourth)....... :-D



Post Reply

Return to “State Ballot Challenges”