E-Filed 03/26/2013 @ 03:57:59 P M Honorable Robert Esdale Clerk Of The Court

Case No. 1120465

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

HUGH MCINNISH,

et a l . , Appellan-ts

V.

BETH CHAPMAN, SECRETARY OF STATE Appellees.

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY CV 2012-1053

BRIEF OF THE APPELLANTS

ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED

L. Dean Johnson L. DEAN JOHNSON, P.O. 4030 Balmoral Dr., S u i t e B H u n t s v i l l e , AL 35801 T e l : (256) 880-5177 L a r r y Klayman KLAYMAN LAW FIRM 2020 P e n n s y l v a n i a Ave, NW S u i t e 800 Washington, D.C. 20006 T e l : (310) 595-0800 Attorneys f o r Appellants

STATEMENT REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT Pursuant t o Rules 28(a)(1) a n d 3 4 ( a ) , A l a . R. App. P,,

ORAL ARGUMENT I S REQUESTED

Appellants argument i n t h i s Circuit Court.

Hugh M c l n n i s h

and V i r g i l

Goode r e q u e s t

oral

case f o l l o w i n g the erroneous r u l i n g o f t h e question of

This case i n v o l v e s t h e important

whether t h e Alabama S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e has a d u t y t o i n v e s t i g a t e a presidential candidate's qualifications, when c r e d i b l e has been

evidence and i n f o r m a t i o n from an o f f i c i a l presented office. The S e c r e t a r y oath o f o f f i c e that i n d i c a t e s t h ecandidate

source

may n o t be q u a l i f i e d f o r

has an a f f i r m a t i v e d u t y t h a t stems from h e r

u n d e r b o t h t h e U.S. a n d A l a b a m a C o n s t i t u t i o n s , t o from f r a u d and o t h e r misconduct by w i t h e v i d e n c e from an o f f i c i a l

protect thec i t i z e n s candidates. source,

A f t e r being presented

theSecretary

has r e f u s e d t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e f o r President o f the United States.

q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of candidates As a r e s u l t o f h e r i n a c t i o n , for for

a p e r s o n b e l i e v e d t o be u n q u a l i f i e d official

t h a t o f f i c e h a s b e e n e l e c t e d . As t h e c h i e f e l e c t i o n t h e S t a t e o f Alabama, t h e S e c r e t a r y

i s the responsible names f r o m appearing

person with the duty t o prevent on t h e b a l l o t . Ala.

ineligible

Code §17-16-44, t h e J u r i s d i c t i o n - S t r i p p i n g s t a t u t e ,

i

does not a p p l y t o t h i s case Court to a s c e r t a i n the

s i n c e A p p e l l a n t s are not a s k i n g conduct, or r e s u l t s of an

the

"legality,

e l e c t i o n , " but eligibility

r a t h e r t o a s c e r t a i n the a u t h o r i t y t o

verify

o f c a n d i d a t e s f o r p r e s i d e n t ; T h e r e i s no s t a t u t e her duty. the

which p r o h i b i t s the S e c r e t a r y from performing The fact that this i s s u e was

not r e s o l v e d b e f o r e

e l e c t i o n d o e s n o t moot t h e q u e s t i o n , b e c a u s e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y i s present review". for this i s s u e t o be "capable of r e p e t i t i o n yet evading

S i n c e e l e c t i o n s h a p p e n e v e r y y e a r , and

presidential occur

e l e c t i o n s occur every i n any election cycle,

f o u r y e a r s , t h e p o t e n t i a l harm c o u l d not j u s t the e l e c t i o n j u s t past. i s erroneous as a m a t t e r The of

d e c i s i o n of the C i r c u i t The

Court

law.

S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e i s r e q u i r e d and

a u t h o r i z e d by l a w t o a c t matters. ordered

to p r o t e c t the c i t i z e n s of t h i s s t a t e i n a l l e l e c t i o n

P l a i n t i f f s b e l i e v e t h a t t h e S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e s h o u l d be to v e r i f y the q u a l i f i c a t i o n s election, and f o r a l l the p r e s i d e n t i a l

candidates

i n t h e 2012

t h a t o r a l argument would a i d t h i s case.

Court's d e c i s i o n i n t h i s

ii

F. II... I.i i iii-iv v vi vii-viii 1 4 5 7 8 9 9 ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S RENEWED MOTION TO DISMISS . 10 This case i s n o t moot 11 13 17 18 19 Three e x c e p t i o n s t o mootness Attorney General's Sheriff opinion Arpaio's a f f i d a v i t Secretary of State's l e t t e r not e x c l u s i v e t o California A u t h o r i t y t o adjudge c a n d i d a t e s Congress Court has s u b j e c t matter 20 21 21 22 G. E. D. INTRODUCTION i . B.. jurisdiction parties too late P l a i n t i f f s have j o i n e d n e c e s s a r y P l a i n t i f f s ' c l a i m was n o t f i l e d in . C.TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENT REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS L I S T OF APPENDICES STATEMENT OF J U R I S D I C T I O N TABLE OF AUTHORITIES STATEMENT OF THE CASE STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES STATEMENT OF FACTS STATEMENT OF THE STANDARD OF REVIEW SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ARGUMENT I. H. A.

3. 2. K. L. P. N. M. 35 37 40 iv . C a s e s h o u l d be d e c i d e d on i t s m e r i t s C r e d i b l e e v i d e n c e o f f r a u d i n Obama b i r t h C o l d case posse Forgery i n b i r t h certificate likely 22 certificate23 23 23 23 26 certificate 27 Dr.J. f o r w r i t o f mandamus a r e p r e s e n t right to order t o perform 27 28 29 33 Clear legal Duty o f respondent L a c k o f a n o t h e r remedy Properly invoked j u r i s d i c t i o n of t h e Court CONCLUSION CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE . 0.... A. Jerome C o r s i a i d e d c o l d case posse Where Obama was b o r n i n d i s p u t e Sheriff forged A r p a i o says p r o b a b l e cause b i r t h Q. A l l elements 1.

P e a c e and Freedom P a r t y C e n t r a l C o m m i t t e e ) Appendix C Affidavit of Sheriff Arpaio Appendix D V . No.LIST OF APPENDICES Attorney Allen General's Opinion No. 1998-200 Appendix A Appendix B V. Bennett C a l i f o r n i a S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e Jordan l e t t e r t o Jack Weinberg ( C h a i r m a n .

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION T h i s C o u r t h a s j u r i s d i c t i o n p u r s u a n t t o A l a . Code § 1 2 - 2 7(1) w h i c h g r a n t s t h e A l a b a m a Supreme C o u r t j u r i s d i c t i o n appeals. T h i s case i s an a p p e a l from t h e C i r c u i t Alabama. t o hear

Court of

Montgomery C o u n t y ,

vi

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Cases Alabama 2004}. Allen Republican Party v. McGinley, 893 So. 2 d 337, 342 { A l a ,

V. Bennett,

823 So. 2d 679 (Alabama 2001)

Barber v. Cornerstone Cmty. Outreach, Inc., 42 S o , 3 d 65, 70-71 ( A l a . 2 0 1 0 ) , q u o t i n g Cnty. Of Los Angeles v. Davis, 440 U. S. 625, 631 (1979) Bell V. Eagerton, 908 So 2 d 204 ( A l a . 2002) 349 U.S. 294 (1955)

Brown v . Board

of Education,

Coady v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, The Commonwealth C o u r t o f P e n n s y l v a n i a , No. 598 M. D. 2 0 0 1 , "an u n r e p o r t e d s i n g l e - j u d g e 'Memorandum O p i n i o n " ' Cooper Ex Parte Ex parte Golden Hollander V. Aaron, Collins, Integon v. Zwickler, v. McCain, 358 U.S. 1 84 So.3d Corp.,612 (1958). 48, 50 (Ala. 2010).

So.2d 497, 499 ( A l a . 1 9 9 5 ) .

394 U.S. 103 (1969) 566 F.Supp.2d 63,68 (D.N.H. 2008) Second

In re: Stephen J., A p p e l l a t e C o u r t o f I l l i n o i s , D i s t r i c t , No. 2-09-0472 Marbury McPherson Moore Puerto v. Madison, v. Blacker, 5 U.S. 137 146 U.S. 1, 35 (1892)

v. O g i l v i e , Rico

394 U.S. 814. 483 U.S. 228

v. Branstad,

R i c e V. Chapman, 51 So.3d 281, 284 ( A l a . 2 0 1 0 ) . Roe V. Wade, 410 U.S. 1 1 3 , 166 (1973)

vii

SEC V. Medical (1972)

committee

for Human Rights,

404 U.S.

403

United

States

v. Munsingwear,

Inc.,

340 U.S.

36

1950)

S t a t u t e s And Other L e g i s l a t i v e A u t h o r i t y A l a . Code § 6-6-640: Commencement by P e t i t i o n ; amendments; r e l i e f upon i s s u e s p r e s e n t e d Ala. Ala. Code § 12-2-7(1): J u r i s d i c t i o n answer t h e r e t o ; generally

and p o w e r s o f c o u r t

Code § 1 7 - 1 - 3 : C h i e f E l e c t i o n s O f f i c i a l s

A l a . Code § 1 7 - 9 - 3 : P e r s o n s E n t i t l e d t o Have Names P r i n t e d on B a l l o t s ; F a i l u r e of S e c r e t a r y of State t o C e r t i f y Nominations A l a . Code § 1 7 - 1 4 - 2 0 , e t s e q : C a n v a s s o f E l e c t i o n R e t u r n s b y State O f f i c i a l s A l a . Code § 1 7 - 1 6 - 4 4 : A l a b a m a J u r i s d i c t i o n Appeal A l a . Code § 3 2 - 6 - 8 ( b ) : Learner's Licenses i n Election Contests;

Temporary I n s t r u c t i o n and

U.S. C o n s t . A r t I I , §1, c l . 5 Ala. C o n s t , o f 1 9 0 1 , a r t . X V I , §279, c l . 1

Other

Authorities

Ala.

A t t ' y Gen. Op. No. 1998-200 ( A u g u s t 12, 1998)

viii

Secretary requested i n her o f f i c i a l The Prayer c a p a c i t y as t h e i n the of of State. To f o r t h e November i s s u e a p r e l i m i n a r y and the placement permanent Alabama injunction ballot preventing their on t h e 2012 until eligibility had been c o n c l u s i v e l y determined.STATEMENT OF This dismissal Court. This case i s before Circuit this case with i s a direct prejudice appeal entered THE CASE of Circuit from a judgment by t h e Montgomery Court on a p p e a l f r o m an order and by t h e Montgomery Virgil Goode's Court denying Hugh M c l n n i s h ' s Other petition f o r a Writ Relief. 1 . r e c e i p t of such a prerequisite to their ballot placed general on t h e Alabama election. name 6. that for Relief the Court order the Secretary t o demand t h a t a l l candidates States f o r the O f f i c e of copy of President their bona of the United fide birth to cause a c e r t i f i e d c e r t i f i c a t e t o be d e l i v e r e d to the official i n charge a n d t o make being 2012 Secretary of the directly from the government i n which the record depository i t i s stored. o f Mandamus o r Such p e t i t i o n Appropriate directed Alabama petition State Extraordinary is t o B e t h Chapman.

Mclnnish and Goode f i l e d This case suit in the October Circuit to the Court 2012: o f Montgomery County. and was assigned H o n o r a b l e E u g e n e W. 12. Timeline of February and others Case 2012: the Mclnnish Office together the with his attorney State. violating U. t h a t the Secretary's Dismiss -the 2. Deputy S e c r e t a r y of f o r the Secretary of i n the a b s e n c e o f and office represented legitimacy under the that her of any and would not thus i n v e s t i g a t e the her duties candidate. which Mclnnish 31. for Secretary of and motion to dismiss. a motion the conference s i n c e time of 2 . State. of Secretary of which the speaking Emily Thompson. Alabama C o n s t i t u t i o n s . was i n error.S. the as time was 6. Reese. 11. 2012: Mclnnish was and Goode f u l l y October status Goode f i l e d the essence. at visited Hon. 18. 2012: October Mclnnish Goode f i l e d a motion time to for 5 summary j u d g m e n t a n d days. of a motion to the essence shorten to get response a d e c i s i o n before November October 2 012 2012: presidential The election. State filed her opposed.The Motion Court to below held. granted. State.

Obama h a d " w o n " that this case vote the election should and law and e q u i t y at least before require the be d e c i d e d electors on December 17. the Court. a n d Goode a l s o was h e l d b e f o r e 2012: A h e a r i n g day. filed h e r renewed opposed. Judge Reese. i n a one-sentence No order. since lawsuit i s of great importance. 2 0 1 0 : The S e c r e t a r y which Mclnnish motion t o dismiss. November 10. November 2 0 . 2012: this Mclnnish a n d Goode filed a as Praecipe. explanation January appeal 17. December On t h e same dismissed dismissal 6. 2 0 1 2 a n d t h i s case was resolved. f o r the the case with was given. filed a timely notice of to this 3 . 2012.election not was u p c o m i n g on November 6. prejudice. 2013: A p p e l l a n t s Court.

issues f o r appeal Whether under the t h i s case i s ripe are as follows: to the mootness the exceptions for review. doctrine election 2. even though about which i t revolves i s past.STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES The 1. Secretary of S t a t e has a duty to Whether the investigate evidence presented for and a candidate's q u a l i f i c a t i o n s when an official may credible has been i n f o r m a t i o n from the source not be that indicates candidate qualified Office. 4 .

certificate. 2. on August 4. §6. Verified that OBAMA's within the United there (C8) I n s t e a d . time the Office of the Secretary Thompson. M c l n n i s h .I the 8. Deputy at which t h e Hon. This subject B a r a c k Obama.c a l l e d " l o n g . certificate" i s credible evidence "birth published o n t h e i n t e r n e t was altered or otherwise fraudulent. a n d K e n y a n B r i t i s h Sr.f o r m " (C8) form Verified Compl. Barack and under media and p o l i t i c a l Obama p u b l i s h e d purported Hawaii Stanley birth on t h e i n t e r n e t an e l e c t r o n i c v e r s i o n o f a certificate alleging h i sbirth citizen i n Honolulu.STATEMENT OF THE FACTS On o r a b o u t A p r i l presidency. No p h y s i c a l . together with h i s of On F e b r u a r y attorney State. p a p e r certificate establish Compl. 1 9 6 1 t o A m e r i c a n mother. father. 2 0 1 2 . birth A n n Dunham. her office would not i n v e s t i g a t e t h e e l i g i b i l i t y 5 . was t h e s o . 2011. E m i l y speaking Secretary behalf that of State. i n t h e absence o f and on represented to Mclnnish of of the Secretary of State. copy o f t h e a c t u a l long i n order to birth has been produced birth definitively States. visited and o t h e r s .after 2 years into h i s pressure.

2012 Verified Mclnnish Goode f i l e d seeking suit in a Circuit Court o f Montgomery County to the Alabama t o have of o f mandamus i s s u e d her to Secretary State names in compelling had demand f r o m a l l c a n d i d a t e s to her for inclusion President of on the whose been s u b m i t t e d f o r the birth the ballot Alabama.any candidate. shall the a bone f i d e be certificate. O f f i c e of United States. thus violating her duties Compl. and Alabama C o n s t i t u t i o n s . Secretary who was Such b i r t h of State certificate from delivered to the directly of the government o f f i c i a l depository i n which i n charge stored. (09) U. § and under the 13. records i t was 6 . On the writ October 11.S.

McGinley. 893 So.STATEMENT OF THE STANDARD OF REVIEW "Questions Republican 2004) . Party o f law a r e reviewed v. de novo." Alabama (Ala. 342 7 . 2 d 337.

of office the Alabama Constitutions. case We i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s c h e r i s h anything andhold e l e c t i o n s matter our r i g h t t o vote a t least every two and this yet Resolution of this must s t i l l occur i s n o t moot b e c a u s e review. officer f o r the state. 8 . ofoffice t o support both Constitutions t o have t o investigate their the e l i g i b i l i t y o f t h o s e who w i s h presidential respectfully perform Alabama names a p p e a r o n t h e A writ o f mandamus m u s t election be i s s u e d ballots. required f o r an e l e c t i o n t o tabulated. as t h e hasan a f f i r m a t i v e the Alabama duty under her oath a n d U. elections i t i s "capable ofrepetition evading In chief the S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e o f Alabama.SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT Because resolution the l e n g t h o f time matters required t o receive a of election i n the c o u r t s f a r exceeds t o be h e l d . i t does and the swearing i n o f a new o f f i c e criteria for not f a l l under the t r a d i t i o n a l mootness. requiring the Secretary o f State t o o f the State o f under both her duties owed t o t h e c i t i z e n s t o her oath andt o her duties a n d U. t h e amount o f t i m e results holder. more t h a n years." addition.S.S.

1. S. Or armed f o r c e s .ARGUMENT INTRODUCTION A gnawing indeed question vexes t h e Alabama body p o l i t i c and Obama. 9 . t h e the e n t i r e country: I s Barack Hussein man e n s c o n c e d our i n t h e W h i t e House. S e c . 5 o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n . Although a President be a II. that evidence The lies U. " b o r n on A m e r i c a n citizens. A r t i c l e t h e U." o n e who h a s a r r i v e d a t i s compelling p o s i t i o n by fraud that thetruth and d e c e i t ? There with the latter. C o n s t i t u t i o n . U. C l . C l . C o n s t i t u t i o n r e q u i r e s citizen. "natural-born" Sec.S. not necessarily natural-born question regarding That Obama i s w h e t h e r h e i s a i s . minimum r e q u i r e m e n t s mandated by A r t i c l e f o rthe o f f i c e I I . a mere " c i t i z e n .S. 5. t h e Commander i n C h i e f o f leader o f t h e Free high World. C o n s t i t u t i o n d o e s n o t i ti scertainly distinct from define natural-born citizen. The core and i ti su s u a l l y taken soil of parents both t o mean a p e r s o n o f whom a r e a t l e a s t citizens themselves. t h e t r a d i t i o n a l qualified constitutionally is his t o occupy t h i s office? he a " p r e t e n d e r high t o the throne. whether he meets t h e o f President as natural-born citizen. 1.

suit asks this Court to resolve this critically question b y i s s u i n g a w r i t o f mandamus t o t h e of State d i r e c t i n g her to require a l l 2012 e l e c t i o n t o Secretary presidential s u b m i t bona candidates fide birth i n the recent certificates to her f o r verification. that he c o n c u r r e d w i t h some o r a l l o f t h e We will. fact that the e l e c t i o n i s past infra does n o t o b v i a t e t h e i t moot. and o f f e r e d to the public purported c a l l e d the short-form c e r t i f i c a t e and long-form c e r t i f i c a t e . are left with the dismissing assumption averments t h e case. The question. accordingly. n o r a s we e x p l a i n does i t r e n d e r Answers t o D e f e n d a n t ' s Renewed M o t i o n t o D i s m i s s The court below g a v e no h i n t o f i t s r a t i o n a l e f o r We. these points 10 . i n Chapman's m o t i o n address to dismiss. i n turn. Obama h a s p r o d u c e d birth the certificates.In an e f f o r t to resolve this persistent question two Mr. therefore. However d e t a i l e d e x a m i n a t i o n o f h a s shown g l a r i n g suspicion that both anomalies a r e computer- these documents by experts which point generated This important Alabama to the strong forgeries.

In 631 q u o t i n g Cnty. i s moot. the case Angeles Davis. Los (Ala. was held a case o f non-mootness. Barber. 3d 65. support of her motion Cmty.. 625. Bell as cited involved a case i n which a person disqualified County. (1979). not the machines t h e r e was no that not been seized. The Court observed t o use which defendants in alleged. she cited 42 the case of So. a sense. S.2010). but had had agreed not not further the machines agreed to r e f r a i n and that. Eagerton. The a candidate for circuit judged judge i n Lowndes Bell d i d not c a s e was t o be m o o t s i n c e 11 . of asked that our c a s e be d i s m i s s e d on the mootness. that t h e o p e r a t o r s had. 2002). Barber 70-71 440 U. the q u e s t i o n of mootness. that i t does not support Chapman's c l a i m the present case Bell v. operate Since machines. Of Cornerstone Inc. seized. v. involved used the seizure i n an by state illegal first authorities gambling addressed had of slot machines allegedly The Court the operation i n Lowndes County. from u s i n g further. 908 So 2d 204 was Chapman a l s o (Ala. assurance new this that the o p e r a t o r s would T h e r e f o r e Barber was p r o c u r e and n o t moot. Outreach.Chapman f i r s t grounds In V.

take the proper legal actions. to stop the e l e c t i o n and d i d not c o n t e s t d i d not involve and i s not i n which wished after the e l e c t i o n The s u i t the legitimacy of the would-be candidate. was h e l d . The e x c e p t i o n s a r e b y many. 2 0 0 1 . Specifically he f a i l e d he to seek an i n j u n c t i o n to it be a c a n d i d a t e .j u d g e 'Memorandum Opinion"' The p r e s e n c e sufficient following o f any one o f t h e s e three factors i s to defeat examples: a m o o t n e s s c l a i m . The C o m m o n w e a l t h C o u r t o f P e n n s y l v a n i a . Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole. event relevant to the present that this Court considers the under the present i t nevertheless f a l l s exceptions recognized special and t o t h e m o o t n e s s d o c t r i n e . v. as shown i n t h e 12 . " a n u n r e p o r t e d s i n g l e . Coady v. Pennsylvania i n p a r t as and i s s t a t e d w i t h Board of Probation clarity i n Coady reads Parole. o r (3) a p a r t y t o t h e c o n t r o v e r s y w i l l s u f f e r some d e t r i m e n t w i t h o u t t h e c o u r t ' s d e c i s i o n . i f n o t most s t a t e s . No. case. 598 M. (2) t h e c o n d u c t complained of i s capable of r e p e t i t i o n yet a v o i d i n g r e v i e w . which follows: T h i s c o u r t w i l l d e c i d e q u e s t i o n s t h a t have o t h e r w i s e b e e n r e n d e r e d moot when one o r more o f t h e f o l l o w i n g t h r e e e x c e p t i o n s a p p l y : (1) t h e c a s e i n v o l v e s questions of great p u b l i c importance. In the u n l i k e l y case moot. D.

J. case such t o be i n s e r i o u s doubt. repetition 814. The present and 1: case falls under each of moot: involves a question question of and of of the three named exceptions. Parole.E x c e p t i o n 1. Pennsylvania Questions of Board of of great public Probation No. t h e r e f o r e i s not The present case Exception extreme p u b l i c whether the importance. Pennsylvania M. The complaint here i s that the l e g i t i m a c y least one any has E x c e p t i o n 2: of the candidates. present l o o k no further to conclude cases that i t i s impracticable to adjudicate the time names a r e submitted to the between 13 . review. t h a t can. government. and i s without will this a complaint we need probably than the recur. evading E x c e p t i o n 3. Ogilvie. Capable of 394 U..S. Coady v. A p a r t y would s u f f e r of a detriment. are I t goes t o the t o be citizenry in their protected against fraud I t goes t o the very heart dishonesty our self elections. Stephen No. District. D. where the l e g i t i m a c y of at been determined question Moreover. Moore v. Commonwealth C o u r t E x c e p t i o n 2. 2001. 2-09-0472. and 598 but importance. Second In re: A p p e l l a t e Court Illinois.

4 0 3 ( 1 9 7 2 ) .S. 404 U. case. 394 U. Exception y e t avoiding review. United States v. f o r t h em a j o r i t y ..S. and not simply a t t h e date the a c t i o n i s i n i t i a t e d . SEC v. s h o u l d be a s s u r e d candidate. Munsingwear. n o t competing w i t h an i n e l i g i b l e The classic to reach and best known c a s e of application of these rules a decision Justice on nonmootnes i s t h a t o f Roe v. Medical committee for Human Rights. as p r e s e n t complained i n t h e next o f i s capable election of t h e conduct repetition. Zwickler. 36 1 9 5 0 ) .Secretary As election trial and o f S t a t e and t h e e l e c t i o n i n this i sheld. t h a t he a presidential candidate. Mclnnish i n t h a t as that and Goode w i l l they a direct detriment citizens their have been d e p r i v e d o f t h e a s s u r a n c e and t h a t o n l y votes o f counted and recorded. 3 4 0 U. 1 0 2 ( 1 9 6 9 ) . Inc. election was h o n e s t . every c o n t e s t o f an length of a year i s t r u e by analogy would s i m i l a r l y be mooted by t h e s h e e r Yet elections i s just and appeals process. legitimate himself was c a n d i d a t e s were Goode. w r i t i n g The u s u a l r u l e i n f e d e r a l c a s e s i s t h a t a n a c t u a l c o n t r o v e r s y must e x i s t a t s t a g e s o f a p p e l l a t e o r c e r t i o r a r i review. Golden v. 3: W i t h o u t suffer will a decision of the court.S. f o r harm Thus happen every the p o t e n t i a l cycle. Wade i n w h i c h said i n part: Blackmun. 14 .

Pregnancy provides a c l a s s i c justification f o r a c o n c l u s i o n o f nonmootness. i f man i s t o s u r v i v e . Wade. Pregnancy often c o m e s m o r e t h a n o n c e t o t h e same woman. since that i t involves the Allen and an e l e c t i o n of State i s past.S. y e t e v a d i n g r e v i e w " Roe v. I t t r u l y c o u l d be " c a p a b l e o f r e p e t i t i o n . a n d i n t h e g e n e r a l p o p u l a t i o n . t h e c a s e was m o o t b e c a u s e t h e disagreed and B u t t h e Supreme C o u r t 15 . Our l a w s h o u l d n o t be t h a t r i g i d . election I t was a r g u e d was o v e r . a s h e r e . t h e n o r m a l 2 6 6 . Roe h a d h e r b a b y l o n g before r e a c h e d t h e Supreme C o u r t . I t was o b v i o u s l y B u t . I f t h a t t e r m i n a t i o n makes a c a s e moot. abortion not the case case i t would to grant withstanding. applied the mootness exceptions and heard o f Allen In Alabama. 1 1 3 . her relief. i t w i l l a l w a y s be w i t h u s .d a y human g e s t a t i o n p e r i o d i s s o s h o r t t h a t t h e p r e g n a n c y w i l l come t o term before the usual a p p e l l a t e process i s complete. I n Roe Attorney to the pregnant J a n e Roe was suing the District right o f D a l l a s County. p r e g n a n c y i s a s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t i n the l i t i g a t i o n . p r e g n a n c y litigation s e l d o m w i l l s u r v i v e much b e y o n d t h e t r i a l s t a g e and a p p e l l a t e r e v i e w w i l l be e f f e c t i v e l y d e n i e d . the Texas Texas c l a i m i n g law outlawing she had a an a b o r t i o n .B u t when. 410 U. the f o r the court the court case. Bennett ( A p p e n d i x B) i s Secretary that instructive. claimed Secretary ballot Jim Bennett judge erroneously left him o f f the general for circuit i n t h e November that 2000 election. as seen and i n an o r d i n a r y too late above. 166 (1973). particularly of State the case v. be moot.

case in Chapman a r g u e d five We additional shall reasons each that of this these s h o u l d be dismissed. l a w do election Secretary activities" of (Code o f A l a . The S e c r e t a r y of the S t a t e has a no l e g a l duty to investigate The in q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of State i s the candidate. .said: H o w e v e r because the outcome of t h i s case could Impact future e l e c t i o n s . every contest of the sheer length an of year next a election trial and and similarly be m o o t e d b y appeals p r o c e s s . 2 d 679 ( A l a b a m a 2001) As i s true would by analogy in this case. valid this case i s not moot i t qualifies exceptions to the mootness doctrine. we h o l d t h a t . t h i s c a s e i s n o t m o o t . ) Allen v. 823 S o . Bennett. address turn: 1. . elections for The not official Secretary of and shall "chief the state provide uniform guidance 17-1-3 ( a ) ) . Yet elections happen e v e r y the p o t e n t i a l cycle. reasons under will n o t become moot s i m p l y b e c a u s e election For as d i s c u s s e d supra. f o r harm i s j u s t I t has as p r e s e n t i n t h e case law election that t h u s become t h e i n Alabama an election has the issues passed. Next. § under 16 State's duties Alabama . ( I t a l i c s a d d e d .

provide If an e x c u s e f o r her inaction. as h e r e . the case o f an e l e c t e d official. argument. 1998-200. Attorney G e n e r a l ' s O p i n i o n No. The o p i n i o n s t a t e s i n eligibility I f t h e S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e has knowledge g a i n e d from an o f f i c i a l s o u r c e a r i s i n g f r o m t h e p e r f o r m a n c e o f d u t i e s p r e s c r i b e d by law t h a t a candidate has not met a c e r t i f y i n g q u a l i f i c a t i o n . t h e S e c r e t a r y o f State should not c e r t i f y the candidate. of "legal duty" were t h e absolute compulsion criterion only in f o r a person performing her duty. especially be halt. O p i n i o n No. 1 9 9 8 . i n the form as she seems t o a r g u e . certainly it her doing i s the right t o do. u n d e r t h e h e a d i n g o f CONCLUSION.2 0 0 . The official S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e had gained source knowledge cause from an t h a t t h e r e was p r o b a b l e 17 to believe . The fact and o u r whole s o c i e t y t h a t s h e h a s "no l e g a l does n o t prevent thing might w e l l duty" t o do a a thing thing when. t h e need Chapman c i t e d {Appendix this to Attorney General's A) C o n t r a r y to the Secretary of State's opinion strongly of at least supports one o f t h e Attorney General's determine the legitimacy presidential been n o t i f i e d candidate's part: c a n d i d a t e s when t h e S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e h a s that there i s a serious question of that foroffice. c o r r u p t i o n would grind to a rampant.

The e f f e c t o f t h e stamp n o t b e i n g p l a c e d on t h e document p u r s u a n t t o s t a t e a n d f e d e r a l l a w s m e a n s t h a t t h e r e i s probable cause that the document i s a forgery. ( I t a l i c s added.f o r m b i r t h c e r t i f i c a t e i s a c o m p u t e r g e n e r a t e d d o c u m e n t . of the date. U p o n c l o s e e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e e v i d e n c e . My i n v e s t i g a t o r s a n d I b e l i e v e t h a t P r e s i d e n t Obama's l o n g . and therefore. J o s e p h M. t h e " r e g i s t r a r ' s stamp" i n t h e computer g e n e r a t e d document r e l e a s e d b y t h e W h i t e House and p o s t e d on t h e W h i t e H o u s e w e b s i t e . h i s S e l e c t i v e Service R e g i s t r a t i o n c a r d .that B a r a c k Obama h a d n o t m e t a c e r t i f y i n g Sheriff of Maricopa qualification. may h a v e b e e n i m p o r t e d f r o m a n o t h e r unknown s o u r c e document. the request County A r i z o n a . a l s o E x h i b i t D) Further. place or circumstances of Barack Obama's b i r t h . i t i s my b e l i e f t h a t f o r g e r y a n d f r a u d was l i k e l y c o m m i t t e d i n k e y i d e n t i t y d o c u m e n t s i n c l u d i n g P r e s i d e n t Obama's long-form b i r t h c e r t i f i c a t e . A f f i d a v i t o f J o s e p h M. legal or otherwise. months-long certificate" being the legitimacy of the "birth of h i s t o t h e p u b l i c as proof as r e q u i r e d by t h e a "natural-born" t o serve citizen Constitution as P r e s i d e n t : D) S h e r i f f A r p a i o stated i n part In an a f f i d a v i t as follows: (Appendix 7. and t h a t i t d i d n o t o r i g i n a t e i n a p a p e r f o r m a t . A r p a i o . Most i m p o r t a n t l y . a s c l a i m e d b y t h e W h i t e House. a t conducted a o f a group o f A r i z o n a investigation into Obama p r e s e n t e d citizens. i t cannot be used as a v e r i f i c a t i o n . was m a n u f a c t u r e d e l e c t r o n i c a l l y . Secretary i ti s not novel t o not only 18 n o r uncommon f o r a investigate the of State . 8. a n d h i s S o c i a l S e c u r i t y number. C 1 9 . A r p a i o .

forfailure but to also t o meet t h e case remove them f r o m t h e b a l l o t minimum r e q u i r e m e n t s occurred Secretary Eldridge since by his by of e l i g i b i l i t y . 1 9 6 8 g e n e r a l e l e c t i o n ballot. the Secretary of State to put issued ballot. J o r d a n determined was i n e l i g i b l e t o s e r v e as p r e s i d e n t set he d i d n o t meet t h e minimum age r e q u i r e m e n t and refused t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n o f 35 y e a r s . t h a t M r .eligibility of presidential candidates. J o r d a n t o Mr. Secretary primary Debra Bowen. of State Cleaver California that F r a n k M. 1968. C l e a v e r i s 33 a n d n o t 35 y e a r s o l d which is a requirement under our federal c o n s t i t u t i o n for president. i n 2012. A p p e n d i x C. because 19 and refused t o old.. J a c k W e i n b e r g . S e p t e m b e r 18. (Appendix Peace and Freedom P a r t y C e n t r a l Committee) C) he s a i d i n part as f o l l o w s : ( P ) l e a s e be a d v i s e d t h a t t h i s o f f i c e w i l l n o t c e r t i f y E l d r i d g e C l e a v e r as t h e Peace and Freedom c a n d i d a t e f o r p r e s i d e n t o n t h e N o v e m b e r 5. L e t t e r f r o m F r a n k M. s h e was 27 y e a r s . h o w e v e r . L i n d s a y . place r e j e c t e d Ms. name o n t h e C a l i f o r n i a . h e r name o n t h e b a l l o t .) Likewise. In a l e t t e r t o Jack Weinberg (Chairman. where One s u c h i n 1968 i n C a l i f o r n i a . I n f o r m a t i o n i n o u r p o s s e s s i o n i n d i c a t e s . ( I t a l i c s added.. one P e t a Lindsay was s e l e c t e d b y t h e candidate of State on Peace and Freedom P a r t y the 2012 C a l i f o r n i a t o be i t s P r e s i d e n t i a l ballot.

and §1. at which 35 requires years of candidates President least 2. i s no bar to a state In There States has official the the Constitution. the U. Constitution. to Secretary the as taken explicitly as support duty to United Alabama Constitution. judge q u a l i f i c a t i o n s r e s t s w i t h Congress. United State States chief P r e s i d e n t i a l Candidate. law as i s required as the enforce States and.S. certainly for a provision i s not of state enforce See Constitutional the unprecedented. of w h i c h has statutory C o n s t i t u t i o n a l means or a Presidentenforcing of challenging elect . 20 . she well i t i s her officer. o f f i c e of the authority to the authority of to the q u a l i f i c a t i o n f o r the does not direct a rest President States no exclusively or with Congress. In r e g a r d t o c a n d i d a t e s f o r P r e s i d e n t . elections Again. official to above. an oath fact. State's for letter President supra C a l i f o r n i a Secretary the barring of announcing the a candidate failing from California b a l l o t for t o meet Constitutional requirements. not eligible under that age. as Alabama E l e c t i o n Constitutional discussed a United to provisions pertaining elections. for Article to be 2. Contrary determine United to this assertion by Chapman.

do is a her have f a i l e d suit merely to join necessary that the parties. of the Nevertheless. t h e intervene approve Alabama case. The C o u r t l a c k s s u b j e c t m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n P l a i n t i f f s ' claims. the their fraud names was of question i s w h e t h e r one o r more o f to have Presidential placed on the candidates ballot. Democrat P a r t y but the lower initial request. contrary to Chapman's c o n t e n t i o n . Plaintiffs This State law. of Alabama asking Secretary under duty under the that Constitution and While i t i s true a B a r a c k Obama was the Secretary specifically of State the needed m e n t i o n e d as to candidate that investigate. for President sought to Obama. were q u a l i f i e d I f . of has State and the perpetrated Alabama.3. jurisdiction. were p r o p e r l y c o u n t e d and reported. court d i d not Therefore. whether Instead. as appears probable. lack here Court does not subject i s not the the matter question presented or whether the votes properly conducted. upon the Court Secretary certainly citizens this subject matter jurisdiction. of P l a i n t i f f s contention duties to applies to Secretary State's investigate a l l presidential Chairman in his merit. the candidates. Chapman's argument 21 i s without . 4. election The was the over Again.

of supra. even i f t h i s untimely valid as Court were f o r the 2012 to i t was hold Plaintiffs' contentions 2012 well. not only to they apply to p r e s i d e n t i a l e l e c t i o n . i t nonmoot. O t h e r w i s e more s u i t s i n v o l v i n g avoiding this issue review is will matters follow r e p e t i t i o n yet in future elections until resolved. T h i s Case Is merits. any sufficient 22 . eligibility i n future of candidates will and the question an be of t o be issue election cycles. needs to capable resolved. As discussed not Moot and S h o u l d Be D e c i d e d on its supra. continue issue the mootness. Plaintiffs' Since c l a i m was f i l e d too their late. w r i t was are still election. Additional The case: important p o i n t s of the argument are important to this following additional points 1. but Plaintiffs of have d e a l t a l l future this elections in their with question discussion Again. p r e s i d e n t i a l e l e c t i o n took place.5. However. this case meets each of one of which is the three conditions to render f o r nonmootness. writ before the 2012 filed that the the as Plaintiffs brought general timely.

asked t o undertake birth an case Michael Sheriff investigation August A r p a i o was f i r s t into Obama's l o n g . This of Sheriff certificate by Barack allegation Arpaio cold i s s u b s t a n t i a t e d by the a f f i d a v i t s of Maricopa posse. County A r i z o n a . suit as move f o r w a r d therefore.f o r m certificate in Maricopa o f 2011 upon p e t i t i o n by 250 r e s i d e n t s o f County. and By acting importance is i n need o f a c l e a r Court now t h i s can prevent confusion i n future elections w h e r e i t may o t h e r w i s e arise. t o r e c u r . 2 0 1 1 . A r p a i o A f f i d a v i t .Plaintiffs. and by t h e l e a d e r o f h i s Zullo. i n Roe v. 2. There Is C r e d i b l e Evidence of Fraud In Candidate Obama's P u r p o r t e d " B i r t h C e r t i f i c a t e . Zullo 23 . Wade. respectfully a n d be d e c i d e d request that this just on i t s m e r i t s since.§ and p r a c t i c i n g attorneys. § 2 (C38) The in C o l d Case P o s s e was c o m m i s s i o n e d b y S h e r i f f o f former law Arpaio October. " There birth i s strong technical submitted evidence of fraud i nthe Obama. a c r i t i c a l which i s presented answer question of statewide here from i s certain this Court. a n d was c o m p r i s e d investigators 5(C35) enforcement Affidavit.

Barack authentic. typesetting. § 1 1 . the Cold Case Posse informed Sheriff In February Arpaio that there was l i k e l y forgery involved with the documents. Zullo § 7. " § 7.Michael Zullo was t h e l e a d i n v e s t i g a t o r f o r the Cold C a s e P o s s e a n d was c h a r g e d whether as the electronic Obama's b i r t h Zullo with the task of determining House document r e l e a s e d by t h e W h i t e certificate was. public a legal i s . Hawaii Department o f H e a l t h numerous policies and procedures.(C 35) 2 012. a t minimum. i n f a c t . document a n a l y s i s a n d Adobe computer programs. {C36) circumstance of Barack Zullo's to. Affidavit. and comparisons w i t h other b i r t h r e c o r d s . m i s l e a d i n g import a s i t h a s no l e g a l document v e r i f y i n g Obama's b i r t h . f r o m numerous e x p e r t s computer generated i n the areas documents. input "were b a s e d upon. review of Hawaii s t a t e law.§ 6. " conclusions and cannot be r e l i e d place and the date. but not limited of forensic as w e l l as. ( C 3 6 ) 24 . ( C 3 6 ) concluded that " t h e document p u b l i s h e d on t h e to the on as White House w e b s i t e .

a j o u r n a l i s t Staff Reporter employed as a S e n i o r b y WND." birth records a r e h e l d by the Hawaii Department § 12 were (C37). 25 . conclusions also supported o f Jerome Corsi. of their investigation.com.In t h e course investigators misleading officials what. as w e l l as any subsequent At Zullo's request. o r i g i n a l of Health. Corsi holds a Ph.D. f r o m H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y and has Dr. Certificate: t o Be P r e s i d e n t . Ph. C o r s i f l e w t o Phoenix. "The a l s o c h r o n i c l e d a s e r i e s o f i n c o n s i s t e n t and Hawaii years government regarding representations that various h a v e made o v e r the past five i fany. " C o r s i A f f i d a v i t the Cold Case Posse's Corsi aided over investigation to write h i s § 6. research h i sextensive t o p u b l i s h h i s book The Case T h a t B a r a c k § Obama 9.(C41) by "Where's t h e B i r t h is Not E l i g i b l e Dr. by t h e sworn and author Zullo's affidavit currently Dr.D. ( C 4 0 ) a l l the research he c o n d u c t e d research. Arizona t o meet w i t h Case Posse and present the evidence he he h a d p r o d u c e d conducted f o rt h e book and r e l e v a n t r e s e a r c h subsequently. turning book. §7 I d . the Cold Dr. C o r s i extensively utilized researched OBAMA a n d h i s p a s t ..

issues of fact that are i n dispute as t o where H a w a i i a s he c l a i m s . C o r s i . and h i s S o c i a l S e c u r i t y Number. h i s S e l e c t i v e S e r v i c e Card. o r o u t s i d e o f t h e U n i t e d § 9 (C41) S t a t e s and i t s t e r r i t o r i e s " H a v i n g been p r e s e n t e d t h e evidence by i n v e s t i g a t o r concluded that "forgery Z u l l o and Dr. a n d h i s S o c i a l S e c u r i t y Number. S h e r i f f A r p a i o and f r a u d was l i k e l y committed i n key i d e n t i t y birth documents i n c l u d i n g P r e s i d e n t Obama's l o n g . Corsi similarly concluded that "there are significant he was b o r n . § 7 (C 39) on i n d i c a t i o n s i sa S h e r i f f Arpaio that based h i s conclusions " P r e s i d e n t Obama's l o n g .f o r m birth certificate c o m p u t e r . both t h a t p u b l i s h e d and t h a t t h a t key i d e n t i t y including his " r e v e a l s a n d shows a l i k e l i h o o d p a p e r s f o r P r e s i d e n t Obama have b e e n f o r g e d . 27. long-form April birth certificate r e l e a s e d b y t h e W h i t e House on § 8Id. Corsi's research. 2 0 1 1 .g e n e r a t e d document. as c l a i m e d and i t d i d n o t o r i g i n a t e i n a paper format. 26 ." A r p a i o Affidavit." Dr. private. b y The W h i t e House. was m a n u f a c t u r e d electronically." § 8 I d .f o r m certificate.Dr.

State t o demand Obama a b o n a birth 3. a n d {4) p r o p e r l y invoked j u r i s d i c t i o n of the court. A p a r t from the q u e s t i o n o f the l e g i t i m a c y of Obama's b i r t h c e r t i f i c a t e t h e r e i s a d i s t i n c t but r e l a t e d q u e s t i o n : Obama h i m s e l f acknowledges t h a t h i s f a t h e r i s Barack Obama. Ex parte Integon Corp. S. t o be i s s u e d o n l y w h e r e t h e r e i s (1) a c l e a r l e g a l r i g h t to t h e o r d e r s o u g h t . A l l the e l e m e n t s n e c e s s a r y f o r o f mandamus a r e p r e s e n t . of otherwise. T h i s . would seem to mean t h a t Obama J r . . Id. who was b o r n i n what i s today Kenya but a t the time was a p a r t of B r i t i s h E a s t A f r i c a . Sheriff cause Arpaio that unequivocally the stated that i s probable document i s a forgery. of i t is reasonable the Secretary certificate. Petitioners address each of these elements in turn. place circumstance Obama's b i r t h . thus making Obama the e l d e r a B r i t i s h s u b j e c t . 672 So. legal Barack or therefore of i t c a n n o t be the date. (2} a n i m p e r a t i v e d u t y u p o n t h e r e s p o n d e n t t o p e r f o r m .^ u s e d as or a verification. 499 (Ala. " With of in this strong evidence of fraud an coming from the as Sheriff provided certainly from Maricopa the County Arizona. a c c o m p a n i e d by a r e f u s a l t o do s o . (3) t h e l a c k o f a n o t h e r a d e q u a t e r e m e d y . was not a n a t u r a l .. 2 d 4 9 7 . s i n c e he was not born t o two U.b o r n American. then. 27 . official source Alabama A t t o r n e y to require fide General's opinion. the issuance of a writ Mandamus i s a d r a s t i c a n d e x t r a o r d i n a r y w r i t . 1995).In "there and summary. c i t i z e n p a r e n t s . S r .

gov/newsroom/releases/archives/population/cbll -215.^ estate taxes. o r g / I n J u l y 2011.census. include income t a x e s . elections of m a i n t a i n i n g constitutional government. each year numerous real he is owes. general he He is a o f Alabama and who voted a l l the registered voter He pays i n the election. h i s progeny. Further. state's honest a clear legal to have duties a chief elections officer i n furtherance perform her to ensure stable. See http://www. i n that and i t is vital his the wellbeing certainly himself. the He h i s share of has a manifest national interest i n the maintenance to of constitutional of has government. and c h i l d .(1) A clear legal Appellants right to the order sought: to the of order the United 2012 taxes have a c l e a r l e g a l is a citizen right sought. He was a candidate O f f i c e of ^ The n a t i o n a l d e b t s t a n d s a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y $17. of V i r g i n i a f o r the and of the United President of Goode i s a c i t i z e n States. debt. w h i c h and typically taxes.719 f o r e v e r y man. the burdened w i t h Mclnnish lawful. See h t t p : / / w w w .6 million. sales among o t h e r s .html/ The a r i t h m e t i c y i e l d s a d e b t o f $53. woman. 28 . t h e C e n s u s B u r e a u r e p o r t e d t h e p o p u l a t i o n o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s t o be 311. right property. u s d e b t c l o c k .7 trillion. M c l n n i s h States.

566 F.the United S t a t e s f o r t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n P a r t y i n t h e 2012 a n d had an i n t e r e s t i n a fair presidential election. The i m p e r a t i v e d u t y S t a t e o f Alabama stems from t h e o a t h o f o f f i c e took a t t h e time s h e assumed o f f i c e : 29 . McCain. 1975 §17of the Secretary of t h a t she 14-20. candidates case. i n t h e S t a t e o f A l a b a m a . Code o f A l a .Supp.N. The S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r o v e r s e e i n g all e l e c t i o n s (Code o f A l a . 2008) o f any be i n c l u d e d i n t h e t a l l y t h a t w o u l d n o t be t h e (D. Being candidates f o r the o f f i c e of President of the United t o compete f o r s a i d o f f i c e f o r the o f f i c e qualified he against denies compelled who may n o t be e l i g i b l e Mr. Goode h i s r i g h t t o r u n a g a i n s t o n l y candidates. personal interest i n having Should from competing a n d he a l s o h a s a d i r e c t and the h i s t o r i c a l the votes record ineligible accurately recorded. e t s e q . and t h e p r i n t i n g of b a l l o t s . election contest States.68 (2) An I m p e r a t i v e d u t y upon t h e r e s p o n d e n t a c c o m p a n i e d b y a r e f u s a l t o do so.H. § 17-1-3 ( a ) ) .2d 63. to perform. See H o l l a n d e r v. still E v e n t h o u g h t h e e l e c t i o n was c o n c l u d e d s u f f e r e d i r r e p a r a b l e i n j u r y as a c a n d i d a t e f o r the o f f i c e o f P r e s i d e n t s i n c e he was p r e v e n t e d on an e q u a l p l a y i n g f i e l d .

and the C o n s t i t u t i o n o f the S t a t e o f A l a b a m a . but purpose.. So h e l p me God.) e.. and such their persons names on are the entitled. State C o d e 1975 as §17-9-3 i n s t r u c t s "(a) The the follows: following persons the they entitled ballot t o have t h e i r f o r the names p r i n t e d on election. those who statute clearly who implies that not seek o f f i c e not are nor qualified. q u a l i f i e d f o r the (Those so by office (Emphasis added. and t h a t I w i l l f a i t h f u l l y and h o n e s t l y discharge t h e d u t i e s o f t h e o f f i c e u p o n w h i c h I am a b o u t t o e n t e r .) "[P]rovided surplusage included only added they are otherwise the qualified" i s not was mere a t whim by law for a L e g i s l a t u r e ." A l a .g.. a r t . s o l e m n l y s w e a r ( o r a f f i r m . C o n s t . o f 1 9 0 1 . they are appropriate are otherwise general provided seek. Secretary shall be of Ala. even p e r m i t t e d . those entitled then certified their respective parties." listed. § 2 7 9 . t o have ballot. so l o n g as I c o n t i n u e a c i t i z e n t h e r e o f .. 1. t o t h e b e s t o f my a b i l i t y . 30 .I. X V I . c l . Further. as t h e c a s e may be) t h a t I w i l l s u p p o r t t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s . By i n the who substantive allowing the those the are "otherwise qualified" t o a p p e a r on there will be ballot.

. 35 excluded. influence 1.. number o f persons. the e l e c t o r s and so framed that ineligibility and Congressional v.This p h r a s e makes c l e a r t h a t that names m i g h t be the lawmakers to were Secretary not not be anticipating of State submitted the which were de the facto. l e g i t i m a t e prima and by that the such as f a c i e .S. oath C o n s t i t u t i o n . but these legitimate allowed on should ballot state's chief elections official. f o r one the provides the Secretary set of State of of has is the has a specific f o r the the requirements President clarified." The McPherson not Blacker. way s t a t e s may i n any eligibility r e q u i r e m e n t s mandated by the C o n s t i t u t i o n . which to uphold. of t o be eligible As Office United States. Supreme C o u r t of the State to ". The three oath of of office i s the common r o o t from which vital the to the our branches government that as spring. I t i s so cited form of Court government Justice Marshall the grounds Supreme J u s t i c e s ' oath for establishing 31 . The taken an U.the with the power and exception the jurisdiction of the p r o v i s i o n s as of c e r t a i n Federal 146 alter U.S. exclusive. m i g h t be (1892).

would be obey the Constitution.. supra. . U.. to her Marbury oath v. suffice to U." and 19'?5 i n view §17-9-3.S.S. i t may 349 1 compelled refer (1955). 5 U. of instructions codified of c o n t a i n e d i n A l a .S. 294 Board v. occasions on to the superfluous to restate has a l l the which t h i s Court imposed upon s t a t e of the officials or a duty obey the requirements of such of Constitution.. Rico State of performance to and Brown Cooper v. she In swore of o f f i c e .S. (1958). candidate i s c e r t a i n l y t r u e i n the whom t h e r e f o r the i s credible sought. would i n which the a f f i r m e d ) t h a t she of the ". 137." Puerto V. allows an 483 a t 228. would-be about concerning his qualifications office The of "It S e c r e t a r y of State. must. . duties. Education. Code i n law supra.Branstad. of course.S.. State Alabama. acting on b e h a l f of the U. s u p p o r t . an imperative duty to determine the Secretary S t a t e has whether the for the c a n d i d a t e s meet t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n a l are eligible requirements on the P r e s i d e n c y and This f o r placement case doubt of a ballot. person I f the to run 32 Secretary of Office ineligible f o r the . 358 U. Constitution the S t a t e o f Alabama. under the Alabama C o n s t i t u t i o n .. Madison. Aaron.judicial fidelity (or review.

the together the his attorney of O f f i c e of the Hon.S. candidate. thus v i o l a t i n g Alabama C o n s t i t u t i o n s . during which meeting of State. i n the state. Appellant visited Mclnnish. outcome cannot on February and 2. of Emily the that Deputy and Secretary speaking State. provides: 33 .S.President violation allowed. govern only be an elected for those does not t h a t may contested. President further specifically the United does mention the Ala. f o r the Secretary represented any and would not i n v e s t i g a t e the her duties l e g i t i m a c y of under the U. offices seq. constitutional Lack of A n o t h e r A d e q u a t e Remedy s t a t u t e s . in Secretary Thompson. 2012. State duty (3) It i s clear that the Secretary of i s u n l a w f u l l y r e f u s i n g to perform her and must t h e r e f o r e be ordered t o do so. and of This mention federal office. A l a . C o d e 1975 enumerated This list of § Alabama's E l e c t i o n Contest 17-9-3 e t . others. absence of her office State. statute allows as w e l l as statute challenges elected not to to a l l Alabama the any judiciary state officers. States i t w o u l d be This in direct be Constitution. Code § O f f i c e of 17-16-44 States. Yet with of of the the United U.

e x c e p t s o f a r a s a u t h o r i t y t o do s h a l l be s p e c i a l l y and s p e c i f i c a l l y e n u m e r a t e d s e t down b y s t a t u t e . of the 1975 and for a contest States. If it the an is in a position candidate and interdict i t from illegitimate exclude Secretary was of State failed the to perform law this of duty. wrong of one o r more p e r s o n s concerning of and the a b o u t whom t h e r e their were l e g i t i m a t e f o r the placed Office on the of questions President ballot without -- eligibility w o u l d be United States p o s s i b l y even e l e c t e d f o r t h a t eligible to hold i t . I t w o u l d a l s o mean t h a t most serious s o r t would go unattended.S. Thus.No j u r i s d i c t i o n e x i s t s i n o r s h a l l be e x e r c i s e d any j u d g e o r c o u r t t o e n t e r t a i n any p r o c e e d i n g a s c e r t a i n i n g the l e g a l i t y . or r e s u l t s a n y e l e c t i o n . w o u l d mean s h e the U. i s s u e of The who eliminates jurisdiction these Alabama and of challenge not other s t a t u t e s do there i s no address the eligibility Secretary adequate remedy. election President United Moreover. conduct. the violating highest this a namely land. Thus § it does not of 17-9-3 i s t h e provide the only election to the contest by for of so and statute. C o n s t i t u t i o n . 34 office being . State i s the to sole the the government o f f i c i a l name o f ballot. A l a Code to §17-16-44 s p e c i f i c a l l y other e l e c t i o n s .

Ex parte CollinSr 84 t o A l a . equity In t h i s demands t h a t f o r every wrong t h e r e be a i n s t a n c e the obvious s i m p l e one.But remedy.g. 4. Code 1975. e x c e p t s o f a r a s a u t h o r i t y t o do so s h a l l be s p e c i a l l y and s p e c i f i c a l l y e n u m e r a t e d a n d s e t down b y s t a t u t e . 1975 35 §17-16-44. what e v e r y permit. remedy i s an each t o do fide to birth extraordinarily candidate t o do I t i s to require teenager i s required a bona the get a l e a r n e r ' s certificate. 3d 281(2010) the Alabama Supreme C o u r t i n v o k e d Code o f A l a . Chapman. 2010). 50 So. " In the case of Rice v. 51 So. C o d e 1975 3d 48. aforementioned §17-16-44 p r o v i d e s : "No j u r i s d i c t i o n e x i s t s i n o r s h a l l b e e x e r c i s e d by any j u d g e o r c o u r t t o e n t e r t a i n any p r o c e e d i n g for a s c e r t a i n i n g the l e g a l i t y . C o d e 1975 official Secretary of t o cause happen. Bar This Action. State i s the I t i s to produce §32-6-8(b) a n d that to A l a . . cases See ju r i s d i c t i o n i n v o l v i n g mandamus p u r s u a n t e. (4) P r o p e r l y Invoked J u r i s d i c t i o n of the Circuit c o u r t s have o r i g i n a l Court to hear §6-6-640. conduct. Code 1975 The §17-16-44 Does Not A l a . A l a . or r e s u l t s o f a n y e l e c t i o n . ( A l a .

§17-16-44 "impact Republican prohibited found matter that one o f t h e s p e c i f i c a l l y reason that the Court I t was f o r t h i s stripped the Court from having subject j urisdiction. that "jurisdiction stripping s t a t u t e . does n o t seek t o question the the l e g a l i t y of the election. Thus.the s o . actions. 16-44 o f any e l e c t i o n " this lawsuit prevents. i t i s only the proceedings conduct. i t h a d no j u r i s d i c t i o n sought the p l a i n t i f f to prevent the Republican ineligible The Party from canvassing votes cast f o r a possibly not timely that qualified. U n l i k e Rice. o f those lawsuit eligibility and the duty seeking to participate of the Secretary of State t o determine the of those attempting to participate.c a l l e d concluded In Rice. Rather results o f an e l e c t i o n . " and t o hear the lawsuit. or results that entertain the t h a t §17- Yet "legality. n o r does this n o r does i t impact i tcontest the i s about the i n the election "conduct" of the election. none by eligibility of the prohibited actions o f §17-16-44 a r e i m p l i c a t e d 36 . c a n d i d a t e who h a d a l l e g e d l y Alabama Supreme C o u r t from found the prevention of a party the 'conduct'" of the canvassing votes would Primary election.

certificate. American f o r want As of which heart Constitutional the simplest of Government. applying bona learner's birth he must submit The original. a teenager an were l e f t a birth unresolved certificate. for the i n i t s d e m a n d s made on of the United a candidate President States.this l a w s u i t and this l a w s u i t i s not barred by that statute. provide honorable his birth r a t i o n a l e f o r the certificate American has at Commander-in-Chief view of Alabama to withhold citizens. This to resolve from the and from the public? i t s fingertips By the power honorable Court this monumental conundrum. joins any a troop. for a Writ granting be Petitioner's request o f Mandamus i t w i l l 37 . Further Constitution office of § 17-16-44 does not preempt the U. CONCLUSION It w o u l d be of paradoxical the lies beyond measure the de of i f the facto our real and grave question a question l e g i t i m a c y of at the very President. of same i s t r u e any f o r a Boy Scout before any artful possibly Could c l e v e r excuse. S. computer words. for a fide explained license supra. documents. sleight an hand w i t h software.

left without as w e l l as t h e p e o p l e a remedy f o r t h e wrong o f the b a l l o t doubt. among c o n s t i t u t e the L e g i s l a t i v e who nor a judge No. citizens of maintained. I t requires virtually of expenditure of time o r money b y t h e S e c r e t a r y holds that f o r every State. t h e p u r i t y o f Alabama's and t h e a n x i e t y o f Alabama supra. admitting Petitioners. requested. He t h e name o f o n e w h o s e Nor i s i t a t y p i c a l legitimacy i s i n candidate that i s in others serious question. that the Deputy S e c r e t a r y was without her office called an i n v e s t i g a t i v e requires of no what The remedy f o r here. simply exist. there i s A maxim o f e q u i t y a remedy. already exists.resolved. w o u l d be to Should wrong the Court not issue the w r i t here o f Alabama. State have been answered. As r e c o u n t e d explained means. others c o n s t i t u t e the J u d i c i a l Branch. b e t h e s i n g l e p e r s o n who c o n s t i t u t e s the Executive 38 . he among seeks to Branch. commonplace no a birth certificate. investigation. purportedly thing: I t merely the production ordinary. who d o e s n o t s e e k t o be a l e g i s l a t o r Branch. most questions ballot stilled. or i t w i l l this n e c e s s a r i l y be a d m i t t e d important of l e g a l E i t h e r way. will E i t h e r a bone fide birth certificate will be not t o produced. requires a very however.

. 4030 B a l m o r a l D r . certified f o r any c a n d i d a t e not responding s h o u l d be decertified. AL 35801 T e l : (256) 880-5177 Fax: (256) 880-5187 Email: J o h n s o n dean(?be 1 1 s o u t h . A n d when t h e g o v e r n e d can s u f f e r to grant lose faith We i n their governors.the President of the United Uncorrected. n e t 39 . result. S u i t e B H u n t s v i l l e . candidates 2 0 1 2 . DEAN JOHNSON. their real i n t h e i m p r e s s i o n among t h e c i t i z e n s g o v e r n m e n t was d y s f u n c t i o n a l a n d h a s i g n o r e d concerns. this society grievously. within I f such birth order i n future presidential are not forthcoming the votes certificates of t h i s 45 d a y s a f t e r Court. this writ u r g e n t l y ask honorable Court ordering the from the candidates which Secretary for to obtain birth certificates States President of the United f o r the election was h e l d i n N o v e m b e r . not without some that their justification. this would States. P r C . a n d d o t h e same f o r a l l elections. l 7 D e a n . i ^ n s o n \ (JOH046} L.

NW. which w i l l send n o t i f i c a t i o n o f such f i l i n g t o t h e following: Hon. L u t h e r S t r a n g e . I e l e c t r o n i c a l l y f i l e d the foregoing with the Clerk of the Supreme C o u r t o f A l a b a m a u s i n g t h e ACIS f i l i n g system. A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l o f A l a b a m a M a r g a r e t L. DC 2 0 0 0 6 T e l : (310) 595-0800 Email: l e k l a y m a n ( 5 g m a i l . F l e m i n g J a m e s W. Esq. KLAYMAN LAW F I R M 2 0 2 0 P e n n s y l v a n i a A v e . D a v i s L a u r a E. com Pro Hac V i c e CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY C E R T I F Y t h a t o n t h e 26 d a y o f M a r c h 2 0 1 3 .L a r r y Klayman. H o w e l l O f f i c e o f t h e A t t o r n e y General o f Alabama 501 W a s h i n g t o n S t r e e t Montgomery. S u i t e 800 W a s h i n g t o n . Alabama 36130 40 .

AL 35801 T e l : (256) 880-5177 L a r r y Klayman KLAYMZ^ LAW FIRM 2020 P e n n s y l v a n i a Ave. 4030 Balmoral Dr. S u i t e B H u n t s v i l l e . DEAN JOHNSON. e t a l . APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY CV 2012-1053 APPENDICES TO BRIEF OF THE APPELLANTS L. 1120465 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA HUGH MCINNISH.Case No. .. D.C. P. SECRETARY OF STATE Appellee.C. Appellants V. 20006 T e l : (310) 595-0800 Attorneys f o r Appellants . Dean Johnson L. NW S u i t e 800 Washington. BETH CHAPMAN.

No.LIST OF APPENDICES Attorney Allen General's Opinion No. Bennett C a l i f o r n i a S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e Jordan l e t t e r t o Jack Weinberg ( C h a i r m a n . 1998-200 Appendix A Appendix B V. P e a c e a n d Freedom P a r t y C e n t r a l C o m m i t t e e ) Appendix 0 Affidavit of S h e r i f f Arpaio Appendix D 2 .

H o w e l l O f f i c e o f t h e A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l o f Alabama 501 W a s h i n g t o n S t r e e t Montgomery. A l a b a m a 36130 1 . D a v i s L a u r a E. L u t h e r S t r a n g e . which w i l l send n o t i f i c a t i o n o f such f i l i n g t o t h e f o l l o w i n g : Hon. F l e m i n g James W. I e l e c t r o n i c a l l y f i l e d a t r u e and c o r r e c t copy o f t h e Appendices to B r i e f o f t h e A p p e l l a n t s w i t h t h e C l e r k o f t h e Supreme C o u r t of Alabama u s i n g t h e ACIS f i l i n g system. A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l o f A l a b a m a M a r g a r e t L.CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY t h a t on t h e 26 d a y o f M a r c h 2 0 1 3 .

1 6 . Alabama Attorney General Opinions 1998.O. QUESTION 1 D o e s the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e h a v e the obligation to e v a l u a t e a n y qualifications of the n o m i n e e s of political parties a n d i n d e p e n d e n t c a n d i d a t e s for state offices prior to certifying s u c h n o m i n e e s a n d candidates to the probate j u d g e s pursuant to s e c t i o n s 17-7-1 a n d 1 7 . within 4 5 d a y s after the s e c o n d primary election. T h i s opinion of the Attorney G e n e r a l is i s s u e d in r e s p o n s e to y o u r request.4 0 of the C o d e of A l a b a m a provides: T h e S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e s h a l l . that a c a n d i d a t e h a s not met a certifying qualification. A G O 1998-200.Ballots . 1 9 9 8 H o n o r a b l e J i m Bennett S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e P. D e a r Mr. 1998-200 A u g u s t 12.Political Parties T h e S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e d o e s not h a v e a n obligation to e v a l u a t e all of the qualifications of the n o m i n e e s of political parties a n d i n d e p e n d e n t c a n d i d a t e s for state offices prior to certifying s u c h n o m i n e e s a n d c a n d i d a t e s to the probate j u d g e s pursuant to s e c t i o n s 17-7-1 a n d 17-16-40 of the C o d e of A l a b a m a . T h e law d o e s not prohibit the S e c r e t a r y of State from informing the probate j u d g e s of his or her r e a s o n for non-certification. certify to the probate judge of e a c h county in the state a Appendix A 1 of 4 . If the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e h a s k n o w l e d g e g a i n e d from a n official s o u r c e arising from the p e r f o r m a n c e of duties p r e s c r i b e d by law.4 0 of the C o d e of Alabama? FACTS AND ANALYSIS S e c t i o n 1 7 .C a n d i d a t e s . Box 5616 Montgomery.1 6 .A G O 1998-200. Bennett. A l a b a m a 36103 Secretary of S t a t e . the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e s h o u l d not certify the c a n d i d a t e .

the S e c r e t a r y of State s h o u l d not certify the candidate. S e c t i o n 17-7-1 provides in pertinent part: (c) T h e S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e must. A L A . the fact of nomination or independent c a n d i d a c y of e a c h n o m i n e e or i n d e p e n d e n t c a n d i d a t e or c a n d i d a t e of a party w h o did not receive more than 2 0 p e r c e n t of the entire vote c a s t in the last g e n e r a l election preceding the primary w h o h a s qualified to a p p e a r o n the g e n e r a l election b a l l o t . . are within the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e ' s official k n o w l e d g e .4 0 p l a c e s a duty o n the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e to certify only t h o s e i n d e p e n d e n t c a n d i d a t e s w h o h a v e filed a written petition in a c c o r d a n c e with S e c t i o n 17-7-1 (a)(3). in the c a s e of an officer to be voted for by the electors of the w h o l e state. O p i n i o n to H o n o r a b l e E a r l e a n Isaac. If the S e c r e t a r y of State h a s official k n o w l e d g e that a c a n d i d a t e h a s not met a certifying qualification. . G . C O D E § 1716. dated J u l y 2 9 . A L A .1 5 ( S u p p . section 1 7 . T h i s Office h a s previously d e t e r m i n e d that the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e is r e s p o n s i b l e for verifying s i g n a t u r e s o n a petition to run a s a n independent c a n d i d a t e . . T h e C o d e d o e s not require the S e c r e t a r y of State to determine w h e t h e r e a c h n o m i n e e m e e t s all the qualifications for his or her particular office. upon suitable b l a n k s to be p r e p a r e d by him or her for that p u r p o s e . c a n d i d a t e s are required to file s t a t e m e n t s of e c o n o m i c interest with the E t h i c s C o m m i s s i o n .2 5 .m. T h e S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e h a s the duty to e n s u r e that the written petition filed by a n independent c a n d i d a t e is in a c c o r d a n c e with s e c t i o n 17-7-1 (a)(3). A l a b a m a law directs the S e c r e t a r y of State to certify only i n d e p e n d e n t c a n d i d a t e s who h a v e properly filed p u r s u a n t to section 17-7- Appendix A 2 of 4 . 1 9 9 0 . 9 8 0 0 1 9 4 . A L A .1 6 . not later than 4 5 d a y s after the s e c o n d primary. If the E t h i c s C o m m i s s i o n provides the S e c r e t a r y of State with formal notice of t h o s e c a n d i d a t e s w h o h a v e not filed statements of e c o n o m i c interest. certify to the probate judge of e a c h county in the state. Similarly. 1997). S o m e of the qualifications. 1997). Y o u r question c o n c e r n s w h e t h e r the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e h a s a n obligation to e v a l u a t e a n y qualifications of the n o m i n e e s for political office. B y official k n o w l e d g e I m e a n k n o w l e d g e g a i n e d from a n official s o u r c e arising from the performance of duties prescribed by law. C O D E § 3 6 . C O D E § 36-25-15(c) ( S u p p .0 0 2 2 3 . W h e t h e r a petition by a n i n d e p e n d e n t candidate fulfills the r e q u i r e m e n t s of section 17-71 (a)(3) is within the official k n o w l e d g e of the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e . to be voted for by the voters of s u c h county.7-1 (a)(3) a l s o requires e a c h i n d e p e n d e n t c a n d i d a t e to file a petition with the S e c r e t a r y of State on or before 5: 00 p. A L A . F o r e x a m p l e . S e c t i o n 17. A . O p i n i o n to H o n o r a b l e P e r r y A . the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e h a s official k n o w l e d g e that the c a n d i d a t e s h a v e failed to m e e t a certifying d e a d l i n e . dated April 19. 1998. A L A . A . C O D E § 17-7-1 (a)(3) (1995). O n l y t h o s e c a n d i d a t e s m e e t i n g the filing requirements are entitled to be o n the ballot. T h i s Office h a s p r e v i o u s l y c o n c l u d e d statutes setting the time for filing a certificate of nomination are mandatory. s i x d a y s after the s e c o n d primary e l e c t i o n . C O D E § 17-7-1 (c) (1995).4 0 (1995). H a n d .s e p a r a t e list of n o m i n e e s of e a c h party for office a n d for e a c h candidate w h o h a s r e q u e s t e d to be an independent c a n d i d a t e a n d h a s filed a written petition in a c c o r d a n c e with S e c t i o n 17-7-1 (a)(3). h o w e v e r . e x c e p t n o m i n e e s for c o u n t y offices. N o . N o . G . a n d to the probate j u d g e s of the counties c o m p o s i n g the circuit or district in c a s e of an officer to be voted for by the electors of a circuit or district. 9 0 .

See A L A . or other a s s e m b l y of a political party must m e e t a statutorily e s t a b l i s h e d filing d e a d l i n e . C O D E § 17-7-1 (a)(1) & (2) (1995). convention. ANALYSIS. If the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e h a s k n o w l e d g e g a i n e d from an official s o u r c e arising from the p e r f o r m a n c e of duties p r e s c r i b e d by law. A s stated a b o v e . the C o d e d o e s not require the S e c r e t a r y of State to d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r e a c h n o m i n e e m e e t s all the qualifications for his or her particular office. is the obligation to e v a l u a t e qualifications limited to a ministerial r e v i e w b a s e d u p o n the facts within the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e ' s p o s s e s s i o n . the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e s h o u l d not certify the candidate. QUESTION 4 Appendix A 3 of 4 . the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e s h o u l d not certify the c a n d i d a t e . that a c a n d i d a t e h a s not met a certifying qualification. If the c a n d i d a t e is required to file with the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e . QUESTION 2 If the a n s w e r to q u e s t i o n #1 is in the affirmative. & CONCLUSION A s stated a b o v e . the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e s h o u l d not certify a c a n d i d a t e w h e n he h a s official k n o w l e d g e that the c a n d i d a t e is not entitled to be o n the ballot. if the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e h a s official k n o w l e d g e that a c a n d i d a t e h a s not met a certifying qualification. M o r e o v e r . ANALYSIS. CONCLUSION T h e S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e d o e s not h a v e a n obligation to evaluate all of the qualifications of the n o m i n e e s of political parties a n d i n d e p e n d e n t c a n d i d a t e s for state offices prior to certifying s u c h n o m i n e e s a n d c a n d i d a t e s to the probate j u d g e s pursuant to s e c t i o n s 17-7-1 a n d 17-16-40 of the C o d e of A l a b a m a . is it p e r m i s s i b l e for the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e to a l s o notify the probate j u d g e s of the disqualification of t h o s e n o m i n e e s of political parties a n d i n d e p e n d e n t c a n d i d a t e s for state office w h i c h h a v e b e e n determined to be disqualified a n d set out the r e a s o n for disqualification in o r d e r for the probate j u d g e s to be informed of the b a s i s of the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e ' s d e c i s i o n in t h o s e i n s t a n c e s ? FACTS. or d o e s it a l s o extend to a n obligation to investigate factual allegations c o n c e r n i n g the qualifications of c a n d i d a t e s for state o f f i c e s ? FACTS. c a n d i d a t e s w h o h a v e b e e n put in nomination by a primary election or by a c a u c u s .1(a)(3). m a s s m e e t i n g . T h e law d o e s not prohibit the S e c r e t a r y of State from informing the probate j u d g e s of his or her r e a s o n for non-certification. QUESTION 3 If the a n s w e r to q u e s t i o n #1 is in the affirmative. T h e S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e d o e s have an obligation to r e v i e w qualifications b a s e d o n facts within his official k n o w l e d g e . it is within the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e ' s official k n o w l e d g e a s to w h e t h e r the d e a d l i n e w a s met. & CONCLUSION A s stated a b o v e .

is the investigation of factual allegations a judicial obligation of the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e requiring d u e p r o c e s s of law or a n e x t e n s i o n of the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e ' s ministerial duty? FACTS. J R . If this Office c a n be of further a s s i s t a n c e . the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e h a s no duty to investigate facts not within his official knowledge.If the a n s w e r to q u e s t i o n #1 is in the affirmative a n d the a n s w e r to question #3 provides a factfinding obligation for the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e in reviewing the qualifications of c a n d i d a t e s for state offices. BILL P R Y O R Attorney G e n e r a l By: J A M E S R. S m i t h of m y staff. Chief. Sincerely. S O L O M O N . & CONCLUSION A s stated in q u e s t i o n 3. O p i n i o n s D i v i s i o n BP/WBM B7.98/M Appendix A 4 of 4 . therefore. ANALYSIS. this question n e e d not be a d d r e s s e d . I h o p e this opinion a n s w e r s y o u r q u e s t i o n s . p l e a s e contact B r e n d a F.

I. Laird h a d b e e n elected to that office in the N o v e m b e r 1996 g e n e r a l election. 1 9 9 2 2 8 9 . H u d s o n . B R O W N . . L . 1992289. for a p p e l l e e don Bervill. Algert S . J a s p e r . a n d C h a r l e s Brinsfield C a m p h e l l a n d William P . 2001. p l a c e no. of W a l l a c e . 2 d 6 7 9 (Ala. creating a v a c a n c y in the office of district court j u d g e . J i m Bennett. Appendix B 1 of 8 . L . M o n t g o m e r y . a s S e c r e t a r y of State of the State of A l a b a m a . atty. Bill Pryor. J u d g e W a r r e n Laird. 2001) Jim Bennett. . . 1 9 9 9 . a n d Bevill w a s s w o r n in on D e c e m b e r 1. 1 9 9 9 . N e l s o n A l l e n a p p e a l s from a j u d g m e n t in a n action filed by J i m Bennett. A l l e n v. December 28. in W a l k e r C o u n t y . J o r d a n . a n d his term of office w o u l d h a v e expired in J a n u a r y 2 0 0 3 . 2 0 0 1 ) . Bennett P a g e 679 823 So. Ratliff & Brandt. O n D e c e m b e r 1. g e n . G o v e r n o r D o n S i e g e l m a n a p p o i n t e d D o n a l d H. Jr. A g r i c o l a .2d 679 (Ala. asst. C . Justice.8 2 3 S o .attys. a m o n g other things. P a g e 680 J o s e p h W . 1. Bevill to fill the v a c a n c y c r e a t e d by J u d g e Laird's resignation. r e s i g n e d . for A p p e l l e e s S e c r e t a r y of state. for appellant. Supreme Court of A l a b a m a . that A l l e n s h o u l d not b e certified on the ballot for the N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 0 g e n e r a l election a s the D e m o c r a t i c Party c a n d i d a t e for a district court j u d g e s h i p in W a l k e r C o u n t y . J r . Clliford III. W e affirm.. g e n . . Nelson Allen. as Secretary of State of the State of Alabama. V. d e c l a r i n g .

Bevill a n d A l l e n w e r e the top two D e m o c r a t i c vote-getters.1 5 9 (2000). 2 0 0 0 . A l a . . C o d e 1 9 7 5 . with neither receiving m o r e than 5 0 % of the v o t e s . S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e Bennett filed a declaratory-judgment action in the W a l k e r Circuit Court. p l a c e no. b e p l a c e d on the 2 0 0 0 election ballot. 2 0 0 0 . A l l e n . a n d that the office J u d g e Bevill o c c u p i e d s h o u l d be included a m o n g t h o s e offices to be filled in the 2 0 0 0 election. a s the A O C h a d o p i n e d . T h e two then met in a run-off e l e c t i o n .4 0 . held o n J u n e 2 7 . Shortly after the m e m o r a n d u m w a s i s s u e d . A l l e n . stating that. 2 0 0 0 . 2 0 0 0 . 1. J i m W e l l s . to certify to the probate judge of e a c h county in A l a b a m a the n a m e s of the c a n d i d a t e s that a r e to a p p e a r on the ballot for the N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 0 g e n e r a l e l e c t i o n . 1 district court j u d g e s h i p in W a l k e r C o u n t y a n d for the a c c u r a c y of the g e n e r a l . in fact. T h e m e m o r a n d u m c o n c l u d e d that. A specific q u e s t i o n put to the court by the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e w a s : W h e n is J u d g e Bevill's term of office a s district court j u d g e d u e to e x p i r e ? After the circuit a n d district j u d g e s of W a l k e r C o u n t y r e c u s e d t h e m s e l v e s . J u d g e Bevill's term of office would expire on J a n u a r y 15. S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e B e n n e t t w a s required. but instead w o u l d expire in J a n u a r y 2 0 0 3 . J u d g e Bevill's term of office w o u l d not.14 of A m e n d m e n t N o . A l l e n w o n the run-off.e l e c t i o n ballot. h o w e v e r . O n J u l y 7. the n a m e s of Bevill. 2 0 0 0 . S e e O p . 2 0 0 0 . this C o u r t appointed retired M o n t g o m e r y Circuit J u d g e William Appendix B 2 of 8 . in v i e w of the conflicting opinions of the A O C a n d the attorney g e n e r a l a s to the p l a c e no. O n M a y 30. a s k i n g that court to construe the pertinent constitutional p r o v i s i o n s a n d to d e c l a r e the n a m e s of those c a n d i d a t e s w h o s h o u l d b e certified to a p p e a r on the ballot for the N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 0 g e n e r a l election. u n d e r the pertinent constitutional p r o v i s i o n s . a n d that. a n d filed qualifying p a p e r s with the A l a b a m a D e m o c r a t i c Party. expire in J a n u a r y 2 0 0 1 . 3 2 8 to the A l a b a m a Constitution of 1901 a n d other pertinent constitutional provisions. the Administrative Office of C o u r t s ( " A O C " ) sent a m e m o r a n d u m to the presiding j u d g e s in c o u n t i e s in P a g e 681 w h i c h a judicial officeholder w o u l d be required to run for election. 2 0 0 0 . a n d the ballots w e r e printed. 1.O n M a r c h 28. the attorney g e n e r a l i s s u e d an opinion. a n d a third p e r s o n . N e l s o n A l l e n d e c l a r e d his c a n d i d a c y for the district court j u d g e s h i p . w h i c h w a s s c h e d u l e d for J u n e 6. J u d g e Bevill h a d r e q u e s t e d a legal opinion f r o m the attorney g e n e r a l a s to w h e n his term of office expired a n d w h e t h e r the district court j u d g e s h i p . In the m e a n t i m e . 2 0 0 1 . therefore.1 6 . qualified to run for the j u d g e s h i p in the D e m o c r a t i c primary. 1 district court j u d g e s h i p in W a l k e r C o u n t y w h e n the primary election w a s held o n J u n e 6. W a l k e r C o u n t y w a s o n e of those counties. by A u g u s t 13. J u d g e Bevill w a s not required to run for office in the 2 0 0 0 election. Att'y G e n .'^''^ P u r s u a n t to 17-7-1 (c) a n d 1 7 . p l a c e no. N o . s h o u l d . H o w e v e r . S u b s e q u e n t l y . After S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e J i m Bennett certified the c a n d i d a t e s . a n d W e l l s w e r e on the printed ballots a s the D e m o c r a t i c Party c a n d i d a t e s for the p l a c e n o . 2 0 0 0 . J u d g e Bevill. pursuant to 6. the n a m e s of all three m e n w e r e p l a c e d on the ballot a s the D e m o c r a t i c Party c a n d i d a t e s for the district court j u d g e s h i p .

4 ( A l a . A l l e n ' s a p p e a l p r e s e n t s a moot q u e s t i o n a n d that. II. E t o w a h . 3 2 8 of the A l a b a m a Constitution of 1901 o p e r a t e s to fill v a c a n c i e s in judicial offices. 394 U . of 1901 with amendments advertised and enacted now or local C o n e c u h . 3 2 8 of the A l a b a m a Constitution of 1 9 0 1 . citing V. M o n r o e . T a l l a p o o s a . (3) that J u d g e Bevill w a s not required to run for the district court j u d g e s h i p in the 2 0 0 0 election c y c l e .14 of A m e n d m e n t N o . for the aforementioned r e a s o n s . pursuant to 6. 8 1 4 . S . 8 1 6 (1969). Vacancies judicial office shall be filled by appointment by the governor. a n d (4) that. r e s i g n s . M a d i s o n . 2 0 0 0 . O n A u g u s t 9. O n a p p e a l . retires. in the Constitution established by a properly law. III. 1. C l a i r county shall be filled as provided hereafter adopted. 1.14 of A m e n d m e n t N o . Bennett. P i c k e n s . b e c a u s e the 2 0 0 0 g e n e r a l election h a s b e e n held a n d the office of the district court j u d g e . S e e Griggs v. Ogilvie. A judge.G o r d o n ( J u d g e G o r d o n is liereinafter referred to a s "tlie circuit court") to p r e s i d e o v e r the c a s e . J u d g e Bevill's term of office a s district court judge. 7 1 0 S o . C l a r k e . A l l e n c o n t e n d s that the circuit court's construction of the pertinent constitutional provisions is incorrect a n d that. accordingly. Walker. W a s h i n g t o n . he s h o u l d h a v e b e e n certified a s the D e m o c r a t i c P a r t y c a n d i d a t e for the district court j u d g e s h i p o n the N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 0 general-election ballot. or as may be otherwise in S h e l b y . (2) that. appointed to fill a vacancy shall serve an initial term Appendix B 3 of 8 . 4 1 2 n. W i l c o x . 3 2 8 in this c a s e a n d h e n c e this a p p e a l is not moot. o n the N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 0 g e n e r a l election ballot. the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e s h o u l d not certify the n a m e s of a n y c a n d i d a t e s for the office of district court j u d g e . in W a l k e r C o u n t y d o e s not expire until J a n u a r y 2 0 0 3 . therefore. however. 1998). S e c t i o n 6. w e hold that the interpretation of 6. other t h a n a probate j u d g e . J u d g e Bevill h a s filed a brief with this C o u r t in w h i c h h e a r g u e s that.14 of A m e n d m e n t N o . a s the winner of the primary election. w a s not o n t h e ballot. 1. the a p p e a l s h o u l d be d i s m i s s e d . J u d g e Bevill's initial term lasts until the first P a g e 682 M o n d a y after the s e c o n d T u e s d a y in J a n u a r y following the next g e n e r a l election after he h a s completed o n e y e a r in office. b e c a u s e the o u t c o m e of this c a s e c o u l d impact future elections. G r e e n e . S e c t i o n 6. T u s c a l o o s a . T h e parties stipulated to the facts of the c a s e .14 p r o v i d e s : " T h e office of a j u d g e s h a l l be v a c a n t if he d i e s . H o w e v e r . p l a c e no. the circuit court entered its judgment. p l a c e no. or is r e m o v e d . H e n r y . 2 d 4 1 1 . W a l k e r C o u n t y . p l a c e no. occurring in any Moore v a c a n c i e s occurring in a n y judicial office in J e f f e r s o n county shall be filled a s n o w p r o v i d e d by a m e n d m e n t s 8 3 a n d 110 to the Constitution of A l a b a m a of 1901 a n d vacancies [or] St. d e c l a r i n g (1) that.

Id.14 s u g g e s t s that 158 of what w a s Article VI g o v e r n s the t e r m s of office of j u d g e s a p p o i n t e d to fill v a c a n c i e s in the c o u n t i e s listed in 6.14 b e c a u s e . 1997). w e h a v e s t a t e d . 2 d 9 3 2 . T h u s .14 of A m e n d m e n t N o . a n d with it 158.^^^ S e c t i o n 158 provides that a j u d g e filling a v a c a n c y shall s e r v e until the next Page 683 g e n e r a l election following the expiration of six months after the v a c a n c y o c c u r r e d . w h i c h a m e n d m e n t . A m e n d m e n t N o . 2 d N o . A m e n d m e n t v. U n d e r the g e n e r a l provision of 6. a n d the office s h o u l d h a v e a p p e a r e d on the N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 0 g e n e r a l . " Hornsby. 2 d at 9 3 9 . h a s b e e n a p p o i n t e d to fill a v a c a n c y in a county s p e c i f i c a l l y listed in 6. 386 S o . If." "In s e a r c h i n g for the proper construction of a constitutional provision. a s the w i n n e r of the D e m o c r a t i c Party primary.14 a s e c t i o n of old Article VI w h i c h a m e n d m e n t 3 2 8 r e p e a l e d in its entirety. Sessions. 3 2 8 . or a s m a y be otherwise e s t a b l i s h e d by a properly advertised a n d e n a c t e d local law. J u d g e Bevill's term of office is g o v e r n e d by 158. 7 0 3 S o . S e c t i o n 158." (Emphasis added. 3 2 8 r e p e a l e d Article VI a n d c r e a t e d the Unified Judicial System. it s a i d .14 h a s specifically r e p l a c e d 158). r e p e a l e d Article VI.e l e c t i o n ballot. a s he did in the circuit court. H o w e v e r . that the l a n g u a g e in the proviso stating that s u c h v a c a n c i e s "shall be filled a s p r o v i d e d in the Constitution of 1901 with a m e n d m e n t s n o w or hereafter a d o p t e d " m e a n s that the term of office of a j u d g e w h o . his interpretation violated the principles of constitutional construction. Siegelman.) T h e proviso in the s e c o n d s e n t e n c e of 6. A l i e n a r g u e s .14. certified a s the D e m o c r a t i c Party's candidate. S e e Hooper 2 0 7 . 1980) (noting that 6.14 applies to judicial v a c a n c i e s in s e v e r a l specifically listed counties. 3 2 8 . u p o n w h i c h A l l e n relies. including W a l k e r C o u n t y . of w h i c h 6. N o t h i n g in the l a n g u a g e of 6. 9 3 9 ( A l a .1 0 (Ala.14 states that judicial v a c a n c i e s in the listed counties "shall be filled a s provided in the Constitution of 1901 with a m e n d m e n t s n o w or hereafter a d o p t e d . w a s part of what w a s Article VI of the Constitution of A l a b a m a of 1 9 0 1 .14 is a part. T h e circuit court rejected A l l e n ' s a r g u m e n t that 158 g o v e r n s the term of office of a judge a p p o i n t e d to fill a v a c a n c y in o n e of the counties listed in the proviso in 6. s u p r a ." W e a g r e e with the circuit court a n d with the attorney g e n e r a l that the Constitution h a s n o w b e e n a m e n d e d by A m e n d m e n t N o . w e m u s t look to the l a n g u a g e of that p r o v i s i o n .14 is g o v e r n e d by 158 of the Constitution of A l a b a m a of 1901. v a c a n c i e s in judicial offices in A l a b a m a "shall be filled Appendix B 4 of 8 . At s u c h election s u c h judicial office shall be filled for a full term of office b e g i n n i n g at the e n d of the a p p o i n t e d term. with A l l e n . T h e plain l a n g u a g e of the p r o v i s o in the s e c o n d s e n t e n c e of 6. 7 0 3 S o . 3 2 8 . 2 0 9 . the court s a i d . a s A l l e n urges. 2 0 0 1 . like J u d g e Bevill. "would h a v e the court read b a c k into 6. controls in this state.lasting until the first Monday election after the second Tuesday in January following the next general held after he has completed one year in office.^"^^ S e e Hornsby v. A l l e n ' s interpretation. Bevill's term w a s d u e to expire o n J a n u a r y 15.

14 e x c l u d e s the Twentieth J u d i c i a l Circuit from the s c o p e of the proviso's operation. 1998).14 c o n t e m p l a t e s p r o c e d u r e s e s t a b l i s h e d by future constitutional a m e n d m e n t or by e n a c t m e n t s of the Legislature that could c h a n g e the p r o c e s s for filling judicial v a c a n c i e s in o n e or more of the listed c o u n t i e s . W e a l s o a g r e e with the circuit court a n d the attorney g e n e r a l that the s e c o n d s e n t e n c e of 6.14 that c a n be c o n s t r u e d a s excepting from its o p e r a t i o n the c o u n t i e s listed in the proviso in the s e c o n d s e n t e n c e of 6. this C o u r t n e v e r r e a c h e d that c l a i m in Griggs. 7 1 0 S o . 2 d 411 (Ala. W e d o not a g r e e .14 w h i c h provides that a j u d g e a p p o i n t e d to fill a v a c a n c y "shall s e r v e a n initial term lasting until the first M o n d a y after the s e c o n d T u e s d a y In J a n u a r y following the next g e n e r a l election held after he h a s c o m p l e t e d o n e y e a r in office" g o v e r n s the term of office of p e r s o n s a p p o i n t e d to fill judicial v a c a n c i e s in A l a b a m a . w h i c h i n c l u d e s the p r o v i s o .14. T h e proviso in the s e c o n d s e n t e n c e of 6.by appointment by the governor. required to s t a n d for election." T h e l a n g u a g e that follows that g e n e r a l provision in 6.14 a n d r e c o g n i z e d that 158 of what w a s Article VI of the A l a b a m a Constitution g o v e r n s the term of office of a j u d g e a p p o i n t e d to fill a v a c a n c y in a c o u n t y listed in the proviso. g o v e r n s only the manner in w h i c h a judicial v a c a n c y in o n e of the listed c o u n t i e s is filled. the proviso in 6. not altering w h e n the term of a p e r s o n a p p o i n t e d to fill a v a c a n c y e n d s or w h e n a n election to fill the v a c a n c y must be held.14. it a l s o provides for s o m e m e a s u r e of uniformity in judicial a p p o i n t e e s ' t e r m s of office.'-^-' the third s e n t e n c e of 6. Appendix B 5 of 8 .t^J With the e x c e p t i o n of J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y a n d two other c o u n t i e s specifically c o v e r e d by constitutional a m e n d m e n t s a d o p t e d s u b s e q u e n t to the adoption of 6. like A l l e n . T h e question p r e s e n t e d in Griggs w a s w h e n w a s a p e r s o n a p p o i n t e d to fill a v a c a n c y in a circuit court j u d g e s h i p in the T w e n t i e t h J u d i c i a l Circuit. Bennett. T h i s construction of 6.14.14 provides that a v a c a n c y in a judicial office in a n y listed county that h a s not a d o p t e d a n alternate p r o c e s s for filling judicial v a c a n c i e s is a l s o filled by appointment of the governor.I-^^ B y a l s o providing that judicial v a c a n c i e s Page 684 m a y be filled a s p r o v i d e d in constitutional a m e n d m e n t s hereafter " a d o p t e d " or " a s m a y be otherwise e s t a b l i s h e d by a properly advertised a n d e n a c t e d local law. A l t h o u g h the appellants in Griggs.14 is dictated by its l a n g u a g e .14) a n d H o u s t o n C o u n t y (a county not listed in the proviso)." 6. W e held that a strict construction of the proviso in 6. "implicitly a c c e p t e d " his interpretation of 6.14 must be read a s only granting the listed counties the authority to e s t a b l i s h a different p r o c e s s for filling judicial v a c a n c i e s . T h e r e is nothing in the third s e n t e n c e of 6. A l l e n a r g u e s that this C o u r t in Griggs v. m a d e the c l a i m that b e c a u s e w e f o u n d that the 158 g o v e r n e d the t e r m s of office of j u d g e s appointed to fill v a c a n c i e s in the c o u n t i e s c o v e r e d by v a c a n t j u d g e s h i p at i s s u e in that c a s e did not o c c u r in a c o u n t y c o v e r e d by the p r o v i s o . w h i c h i n c l u d e s both H e n r y C o u n t y (a c o u n t y listed in the proviso in 6.14. it d o e s not a p p l y to the term of office of a j u d g e a p p o i n t e d to fill s u c h a v a c a n c y .

S e e Hooper v. or s i l e n c e . w e hold that the circuit court correctly determined that J u d g e Bevill's term of office d o e s not expire until J a n u a r y 2 0 0 3 .1 0 (Ala.. 1980). either by w o r d s . Mail Handlers Benefit Plan. Notwithstanding A l l e n ' s a r g u m e n t a n d the a r g u m e n t m a d e by the appellants in Griggs. c o m m u n i c a t e s s o m e t h i n g in a m i s l e a d i n g w a y . he relied to his detriment on Bennett's certification of his c a n d i d a c y in the D e m o c r a t i c Party primary a n d run-off a n d b e c a u s e . 4 3 7 S o . ' a n d "(3) That 'the p e r s o n relying w o u l d be h a r m e d materially if the actor is later permitted to a s s e r t a claim inconsistent with his earlier conduct. A l i e n a l s o a r g u e s that S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e Bennett s h o u l d have b e e n equitably e s t o p p e d from s e e k i n g the declaratory j u d g m e n t b e c a u s e . 2 d at 4 1 3 . with the intention that the c o m m u n i c a t i o n will be a c t e d o n . 3 8 6 S o . 7 1 0 S o . 2 d 6 1 .P a g e 685 b e c a u s e H o u s t o n C o u n t y is not a listed county.14 h a s r e p l a c e d 158 a s the g e n e r a l constitutional provision with l a n g u a g e governing the term of office of a p e r s o n appointed to fill a judicial v a c a n c y in A l a b a m a . 2 d 2 0 7 . c o n d u c t . v. A l l e n s a y s . " W h e n a court is interpreting a proviso. 1983).'" Lambert v. the application of w h i c h is in doubt. " Griggs. J u d g e Bevill is not required to stand for election until the 2 0 0 2 election. Strickland T h i s Court h a s h e l d : Div. w h o usually m u s t h a v e k n o w l e d g e of the facts. A c c o r d i n g l y . T h u s . Bennett u n r e a s o n a b l y d e l a y e d bringing the declaratory-judgment action. w e took no position in that c a s e on the continued viability of 1 5 8 . quoting General Co. 2 0 9 . g e n e r a l c a n o n s of construction require that the proviso be strictly c o n s t r u e d . w h o l a c k s k n o w l e d g e of the facts. IV. 6 4 ( A l a . " T o establish the e s s e n t i a l e l e m e n t s of equitable e s t o p p e l . 1243 ( A l a . 1996). relies upon [the] c o m m u n i c a t i o n . 2 d 1 2 4 0 . Electric Credit Corp. [a party] must s h o w the following: "(1) That '[t]he p e r s o n a g a i n s t w h o m e s t o p p e l is a s s e r t e d . this C o u r t h a s previously r e c o g n i z e d that 6. of Rebel Lumber " E q u i t a b l e e s t o p p e l is to be applied a g a i n s t a g o v e r n m e n t a l entity only with e x t r e m e caution or Appendix B 6 of 8 . Griggs d o e s not s u p p o r t A l l e n ' s a r g u m e n t c o n c e r n i n g J u d g e Bevill's term of office. Siegelman. 6 8 2 S o . Although this Court set out the a p p e l l a n t s ' a r g u m e n t in Griggs. ' "(2) That 'the p e r s o n s e e k i n g to a s s e r t e s t o p p e l . he s a y s .

. T h e S e c r e t a r y of P a g e 686 State h a s no authority to certify n a m e s for p l a c e m e n t on a ballot for a n election that. must be predicated u p o n the conduct.. or s i l e n c e must a m o u n t to the representation or c o n c e a l m e n t of a material fact or facts. quoting v. Headrick 3 5 3 U . D . of a mistake of law. 5 9 4 S o . 1 district court j u d g e s h i p . afTd. c o n c u r . Inc. 2 d 1 2 0 2 . S e c r e t a r y of State B e n n e t t u n r e a s o n a b l y d e l a y e d bringing the declaratory-judgment action. 1992).'" Automobile "'The doctrine of equitable " ( E m p h a s i s a d d e d [in Headrick Club of Michigan State Highway Outdoor Advertising]. affirmed.. 2 d 1290 ( A l a . equitable e s t o p p e l . ' " U n d e r the settled law. A l a . S . H o w e v e r . J o h n s t o n e . the circuit court's j u d g m e n t is d u e to be. E d . w a s the R e p u b l i c a n Party's n o m i n e e for the p l a c e no. at 7 7 2 . AFFIRMED. J J . 4 3 2 S o . L y o n s .. w h o w a s u n o p p o s e d in the R e p u b l i c a n Party primary. v.. . S t e p h e n s . Notes: C h a r l e s R. S a i d conduct. or the s i l e n c e of the party a g a i n s t w h o m it is s o u g h t to be i n v o k e d . 7 6 8 ( M . 180. First Nat'l Bank of Montgomery 1983). H a r w o o d . S e e .. The representation must be as to the facts and not as to the law. 1961). S u p p .2d 123 (5th Cir. A l l e n a l s o s u g g e s t s that the doctrine of equitable e s t o p p e l s h o u l d be a p p l i e d b e c a u s e . l a n g u a g e . W o o d a l i . 1959). a n d is h e r e b y . . Appendix B 7 of 8 . United States. 1 L . he s a y s . S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e B e n n e t t c a n n o t be e s t o p p e d from s e e k i n g the declaratory j u d g m e n t in this c a s e . Dep't v. Ex parte Fields. 1 2 0 4 .. the u n d i s p u t e d e v i d e n c e before the circuit court s h o w e d that the S e c r e t a r y of State a c t e d diligently in s e e k i n g the declaratory j u d g m e n t a n d that he did not u n r e a s o n a b l y d e l a y bringing the a c t i o n .under e x c e p t i o n a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s . 7 7 S . C t . is not s u p p o s e d to be h e l d . Jr. Commissioner. 176 F . 7 0 9 ." Outdoor Adver. 2 8 5 F. a n d Stuart. under the pertinent p r o v i s i o n s of the A l a b a m a Constitution. 2 d 7 4 6 (1957). l a n g u a g e . H o u s t o n . 182.' estoppel is not a barto the correction. S u p p . F o r the r e a s o n s s t a t e d a b o v e . 7 0 7 . ..0 5 (Ala.) 176 F .

14 a l s o specifically provides that v a c a n c i e s occurring in judicial offices in J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y shall b e filled a s provided by A m e n d m e n t s N o . by local law.14. N o . a n d a m e n d m e n t s 3 1 7 a n d 3 2 3 thereof. s u c h a s a judicial nominating c o m m i s s i o n . 8 3 . for e x a m p l e . . a n d until his s u c c e s s o r is e l e c t e d a n d qualified. Appendix B 8 of 8 . N o .S e c t i o n 158 p r o v i d e s : " V a c a n c i e s in tlie office of a n y of the j u s t i c e s of the s u p r e m e court or j u d g e s w h o hold office by election.14 e x p r e s s l y p r e s e r v e s this p r o c e s s . o n e of w h o m the g o v e r n o r s h a l l then appoint to fill the v a c a n c y for filling judicial v a c a n c i e s in the B i r m i n g h a m Division of the Jefferson Circuit C o u r t . 4 0 8 of the A l a b a m a Constitution specifically provide that p e r s o n s filling judicial v a c a n c i e s in the Jefferson Circuit C o u r t a n d in circuit a n d district courts in M a d i s o n a n d M o b i l e C o u n t i e s shall s e r v e until the next g e n e r a l election following the expiration of six months after the v a c a n c y o c c u r r e d . A m e n d m e n t s N o . a n d T a l l a d e g a counties h a v e b e e n a d o p t e d . 3 2 8 states: "Article VI of the Constitution of A l a b a m a of 1901 a s a m e n d e d . 2 0 0 0 . providing for judicial v a c a n c i e s occurring in t h o s e c o u n t i e s to be filled by a n o m i n a t i n g . 6 0 7 . 110 to the A l a b a m a Constitution of 1 9 0 1 . the proviso c o n t a i n e d in the s e c o n d s e n t e n c e of 6. a n alternate appointment process. N o .c o m m i s s i o n p r o c e s s similar to the p r o c e s s u s e d in J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y . 6 1 5 to the A l a b a m a Constitution of 1 9 0 1 . a n d N o . 6 0 7 . are h e r e b y r e p e a l e d a n d in lieu thereof the following article s h a l l be adopted[. 8 3 a n d N o . T h e a p p o i n t e e s h a l l hold his office until the next g e n e r a l election for a n y state officer held at least s i x m o n t h s after the v a c a n c y o c c u r s . N o . 8 3 a n d N o . 3 3 4 . a n d N o . S i n c e the e n a c t m e n t of 6. 4 0 8 . the s u c c e s s o r c h o s e n at s u c h election shall hold office for the u n e x p i r e d term a n d until his s u c c e s s o r is e l e c t e d a n d qualified. 6. or c h a n c e l l o r s of this state.14 "allows the n a m e d counties to retain the flexibility to provide." ^^•I T h e p r e a m b l e to A m e n d m e n t N o .1 5 9 (2000). " A m e n d m e n t s N o .]" S e c t i o n 6. 110 provide a n alternate p r o c e s s a c o m m i s s i o n n o m i n a t e s to the g o v e r n o r three qualified p e r s o n s . shall be filled by appointment by the governor. S e e A m e n d m e n t s N o . T h u s . M o b i l e . Att'y G e n . constitutional a m e n d m e n t s a p p l i c a b l e to M a d i s o n . A s the attorney g e n e r a l stated in O p .

1 Los Angslesj Califomia 90036 Dear Mr. appear on the ballot and your candidate for vice-president on3y.FRANK K . 3^68 Ifr. Jack Weinberg 3^0 North Spaulding. be advised that this office i J i l l not certify KLdridge Cleaver as the Peace and Freedom candidate for president on -iihe Hovember ^.selection (Peggy Terry) and the hO electoral college voters •will be certified* Under California law. JOHDAN SCCRITARY o r STATE O F F I C E or T H E STATE O F CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO 95814 September X8. Sincere'ly. " FEANK JORDAN Secretaiy of State / /' H. that I-tr. Sullivan Assistant Seorotaiy of State HPS/pv/m co: Stuart Weinberg h$ Polk Street San franoisco. just tho nariio of the party and i t s candidatos ^pear on the ballot. P. September 11th. Cleaver i s 33 and not 3^ years old ^. The vicepresidential.^ednesdajr. please. 1968 general election ballot* InfoiTiiation i n our possession indicates.Mch is a requireiaQnt under our federal constitution for president. Califomia / Appendix C 1 of 1 . and confirme^l bjr you. Apt. Weinberg: To confirai our telephone ccmversaticn last V. The Peace and Freedm party name vdll.

The Maricopa County Sheriff s Office is in a rather unique position. The Cold Case posse agreed to undertake the investigation requested by the 250 citizens of Maricopa County. and I have been a law enforcement officer and official. being first duly sworn. Under the Arizona Constitution and Arizona Revised Statutes. and.000 members. I am the duly elected Sheriff of Maricopa County. This group expressed its concern that. citing lack of resources and jurisdictional challenges. up until that point. do hereby state under oath and under penalty of perjury that the facts are true: 1. I. as the Sheriff of the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office. In August of last year. 2. the undersigned. as the elected Sheriff of Maricopa County. Having organized a volunteer posse of approximately 3. The investigation mainly focused on the electronic document that was II Appendix D 1 of 2 .State of Arizona County of Maricopa ) ) ss. 5. This posse consists of former police officers and attorneys who have worked investigating the controversy surrounding Barack Obama. could testify competently thereto. in both state and federal government. no law enforcement agency in the countiy had ever gone on record indicating that they had either looked into this or that they were willing to do so. I am oyer the age of 18 and am a resident of Arizona. I have the authority to request the aid of the volunteer posse. asking if I would investigate the controversy surrounding President Barrack Obama's birth certificate authenticity and his eligibility to serve as the President of the United States. ) AFFIDAVIT I. 3. for 51 years. i f called as a witness. located in the county. a group of citizens from the Surprise Arizona Tea Party organization met with me in my office and presented a petition signed by approximately 250 residents of Maricopa County. to assist me in the execution of my duties. Arizona. 4. The information contained in this affidavit is based upon my own personal knowledge. can authorize an investigation go forward to answer these questions at virtually noexpense to the-tax payer.

6.long-form. his Selective Service Registration card. and therefore. Maricopa County Sheriff Sworn to and subscribed me this 3S9'iDea before b 1 ^ day of 2012. The on-going nature of the investigation is due to additional information that has come to light sinpe we held the press conference in March. 201 Maricopa County. Most importantly. The effect of the stamp not being placed on the document pursuant to state and federal laws means that there is probable cause that the document is a forgery. M y investigators and I believe that President Obama's. I will release that information to the public. 8. The investigation led to a closer examination of the procedures regarding the registration of births at the Hawaii Department of Health and various statements made by Hawaii government officials regarding the Obama birth controversy over the last five years. the "registrar's stamp" in the computer generated document released by the White House and posted on the White House website. Arizona. The Cold Case Posse law enforcement investigation into Barack Obama's birth certificate and his eligibility to be president is on-going. Joseph M . as claimed by the White House.birth certificate is a computer-generated document.aittB ofArim MAMOOMOOUNTV MV v D n i W t M n Kni^^ Appendix D 2 of 2 . legal or otherwise. may have been imported from another unknown source document. and that it did not originate in a paper format. it is my belief that forgery andfiraudwas likely committed in key identity documents including President Obama's longform birth certificate. it cannot be used as a verification. As soon as that information has been properly verified by the Cold Case Posse. of the date. was manufactured electronically.presented as President Obama's long form birth certificate to the American people and to citizens of Maricopa County by the White House on April 27. 7.2011. and his Social Security number. place or circumstances of Barack Obama's birth. 9. 2012. Executed this / p day of June. LYNDA JEMSEMORBM Notw Piittlo. Upon close examination of the evidence. Arpaio.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful