An expedited hearing is scheduled tomorrow (May 23) in the appeal of Gallo and Korman to the Appellate Division of the New York Third Judicial Department over dismissal of their action against Cruz . This is the appeal for which Einer Elhauge submitted the amicus brief that I wrote about previously.
It may well be that Prof. Elhauge’s brief is moot because the case was dismissed previously on technical grounds relating to the timeliness of filing the original challenge. The Albany Times Union wrote then:
According to the Board of Elections’ timeline, any specific challenges to Cruz’s right to appear on the ballot were due by Feb. 4, while the complaint by William Gallo of Nassau County and Barry Korman of New York City was submitted on Feb. 17.
The Board of Elections did not consider the merits of the challenge; however Acting State Supreme Court Justice David Weinstein made an interesting remark in his dismissal, describing the complaint as:
a series of exceedingly thin legal reeds that have never been adopted by any court in this State … would as likely create chaos and uncertainty as provide clarity.
The New York Appellate Division affirmed the lower court decision. The challenge was dismissed because the filing was not timely.
Because some of the same persons who claimed Obama was ineligible to the presidency are challenging Ted Cruz, I decided that his legal eligibility gauntlet was on topic for this blog (just as Donald Trump is topical because he is a birther).