If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!


by Sharon Rondeau, h/t CFK

Mr. Carmon Elliott is challenging an opinion upholding a lower court decision to include Ted Cruz’s name on Pennsylvania ballots for the primary on April 26, 2016

(Apr. 1, 2016) — On Thursday, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued an opinion upholding a lower court’s order that Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz’s name should remain on the ballot for the April 26 primary.

Mr. Carmon Elliott initially filed an objection to Cruz’s nominating papers with the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, whose senior judge, Dan Pellegrini, denied Elliott’s petition on March 10 and consequently directed the Secretary of State “to certify the name of Ted Cruz to the proper officials for inclusion on the ballot of the Republican primary to be held on April 26, 2016.”

Elliott objects to Cruz’s candidacy on the basis that Cruz was born in Calgary, Alberta, Canada.  He is not considering Cruz’s parents’ citizenship status at the time of his birth.

Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution requires the president to be a “natural born Citizen.”  Attorneys and scholars who say Cruz meets the definition rely on his birth to a U.S.-citizen mother which they say, regardless of his place of birth, rendered him a “citizen at birth.”

A researcher who describes himself as “a social justice warrior” and “very politically active,” Elliott told The Post & Email of his work thus far, “I put a lot of effort into it to make sure I crafted something that was legally worthy.  When things rub me the wrong way, such as this issue regarding Ted Cruz’s eligibility because he was born in Canada, I relied on the groundwork I had already done regarding McCain, because he was born in Panama.  So I had already broken the ground in how to research these things and prepare legal documents.  I was just refreshing myself and delving into Pennsylvania statutes.”

In 2008, Elliott filed an eligibility challenge against McCain in Commonwealth Court yielding a similar outcome to his current case, although he did not pursue it to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In order to file a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court, Elliott has set up a GoFundMe page seeking to raise $3,200.  He has spoken with several attorneys who might be able to lend their assistance going forward, and the funds raised will pay for filing fees and other court costs.

Elliott said he “was not surprised” at nor deterred by the opinion issued on Thursday “because the Pennsylvania Supreme Court is in such disarray.  There are two or three justices who have resigned or are under ethical scrutiny right now.  As a result, one of my attorneys said that he doubted that any one of them would go out on a limb by saying that despite how good my briefs were that Cruz is ineligible, because they would be held under a microscope.  They would be somewhat embarrassed by it,” Elliott explained.

“I’m not going into the ‘parents’ issue; all I’m going to cover is the ‘where-you’re-born’ issue,” Elliott told The Post & Email.  “The first step in drafting a submission to the high court will be a Writ of Certiorari. The Supreme Court doesn’t have to take up the issue, but it is so ripe for Supreme Court review.  So many people have been saying that there should be a Supreme Court decision on this issue.”

He added that “The process of my case has allowed it to get to the doors of the Supreme Court; I’m going to try to knock on them.”

Elliott said that when he spoke with the court clerk on his McCain objection, he was told that courts “won’t make a decision that would disenfranchise millions of voters.”  “He had already gone through most of the primary process when I initiated the case.  When it finally got to the court, I think it was just before the convention.  There were already millions of votes cast, and the clerk said, ‘No judge is going to overthrow millions of voters,'” Elliott recalled.

Regarding the eligibility issue, however, he believes that “where you’re born makes all the difference.”

Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. One interesting aspect of this pretended allegiance to Voters the Courts are using as excuses is the Contested Convention spiraling into focus with both possibilities in the Democratic Party losing Hillary Clinton to an FBI INDICTMENT that could cause a fermenting of the Primary Election Voting results to be relatively secured by only a few SuperDelegates.

    And on the Republican side the Establishment Ruse groundwork being done to deny Trump the nomination with dirty boys Cruz and Kasich, only to have Ryan come in as the Establishments pick with the Delegates released of their voter entrusted picks.

    This #ContestedConvention Theory really undermines any integrity to tax-payer funded Primaries.

    Why have them if the elite establishments pick the Candidate as their nominee. And if that’s the Case any interest in #SCOTUS protecting millions of voters is pretended at best, and certainly fiction at best.

  2. For more information on the Elliott v Cruz going to SCOTUS fund raising campaign see this link: https://www.gofundme.com/h3xff4m4

    Please visit his fund raising campaign site linked to above and make a donation, large or small. Please help Mr. Elliott to support and defend our U.S. Constitution and to expose the poser Ted Cruz who is NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the United States and is NOT constitutionally eligible to be the President and Commander in Chief, or the VP. CDR Kerchner (Ret)

  3. Ted Cruz was born 12/22/1970

    Cruz was NOT born on or after 11/14/86
    as required by the U.S. and posted on .gov
    so he was NOT born a U.S. Citizen at all.

    Canada prohibited Dual Citizenship in 1970.

    Cruz’ parents chose Canadian Citizenship for Ted Cruz;
    thus Ted’s need to file a
    Renunciation of Canadian Citizenship
    which was granted 5/14/2014

    Ted and his father Rafael Cruz took a pass on Congress’ 1986 Amnesty
    & Reagan’s delay of deportation for applicant’s children.

    One MUST be a U.S. Citizen for (9) nine years
    to become a U.S. Senator.

    Ted Cruz, born on 12/22/1970, did NOT gain
    (U.S. Citizenship Trough Parents)
    by a U.S. LAW enacted on 11/14/1986,
    15 years, 10 months & 23 days after Ted Cruz’ birth in Canada.


  4. Just show that he is designated by law as a “citizen” and make him prove he is a “natural born citizen”. He has already shown his argument: “citizen at birth = natural born citizen”. There is ample precedent refuting his nonsense. Rather than attempting to prove Cruz is not NBC make Cruz support his theory that he is.


    Cruz’s Mother Eleanor Darragh Birth Certificate in Question

    Breibart related / connected article (Before It’s News)


  6. It’s not about the voters vote, but the Constitution.

    It seems when the potato is too hot, the judges toss it.
    Too much heat? They run from the kitchen. Any excuse
    will do. So much for defending the rule of law, fairness,
    and the Constitution.

    Some of us, “We-the-People” are to blame too. Lots of
    yacking, and not much more in effort.

    We are dealing with evil, and for our own sake, we have
    to continue to fight and defeat it.

  7. Rubio is an Anchor Baby…..NO Citizen Parents!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    I was really surprised that never came up

    A “CITIZEN” is NOT the same as NBC…

    NBC is a higher state of Citizenship….2 CITIZEN parents!!!!!!

    At least that is what I was taught
    when I went to school…..way back when we learned stuff!!!!

  8. Sharon, your thoughts please.
    Isn’t it improbable to have a BAR Member (Cruz) convicted of being a foreign impostor, in his own BAR Members court system by a Judge that is also a BAR member that does not honor the “Constitution FOR the United States”, Law Of The Land. Please consider the oath these criminals took was to enforce and uphold the “Constitution OF the United States”, Law Of The Sea/Maritime Law which does not exist In Law or At Law.
    I suggest when in front of the Judge you may ask him or her to properly identify themselves asking for a copy of the oath they took. You then ask the Judge to read it aloud. When he gets to the part OF the United States you stop him as that oath is a fraud not existing In Law or At Law. The Constitution that represent the People (you and all of us) reads the Constitution FOR the United States.

    The Judge must take a New Oath giving his allegiance to the “Constitution FOR the United States” so we can proceed. Or the Judge is also a Foreign Impostor and enemy of the People.

    Your enforcement is letting the people know of this fraud and they selecting a county Sheriff sworn in under the New oath FOR the United States.

    Respectfully, Richard