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. B.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. I. II. INTRODUCTION i . 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. A. 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 . E.i i iii-iv v vi vii-viii 1 4 5 7 8 9 9 ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S RENEWED MOTION TO DISMISS . C... D. H..

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. M... 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. L. N. 2. A l l elements 1. K. A. 0. 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 . 3. P.J.. 35 37 40 iv .

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 .LIST OF APPENDICES Attorney Allen General's Opinion No. 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

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. r e c e i p t of such a prerequisite to their ballot placed general on t h e Alabama election. 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. 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. 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. 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. 1 .

Timeline of February and others Case 2012: the Mclnnish Office together the with his attorney State. 11. was i n error.The Motion Court to below held. 2012: Mclnnish was and Goode f u l l y October status Goode f i l e d the essence. violating U. 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. at visited Hon. Reese. of Secretary of which the speaking Emily Thompson. for Secretary of and motion to dismiss. Alabama C o n s t i t u t i o n s . State. State filed her opposed. 12. granted.S. which Mclnnish 31. State. 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. Mclnnish and Goode f i l e d This case suit in the October Circuit to the Court 2012: o f Montgomery County. a motion the conference s i n c e time of 2 . and was assigned H o n o r a b l e E u g e n e W. t h a t the Secretary's Dismiss -the 2. the as time was 6. 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.

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

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. 4 . 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.STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES The 1. even though about which i t revolves i s past. doctrine election 2.

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

thus violating her duties Compl.S. shall the a bone f i d e be certificate. and Alabama C o n s t i t u t i o n s . records i t was 6 . 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.any candidate. (09) U. On the writ October 11. O f f i c e of United States. § and under the 13. 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.

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

of office the Alabama Constitutions.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 . 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. more t h a n years. t h e amount o f t i m e results holder. 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. 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.S. 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. 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. required f o r an e l e c t i o n t o tabulated. 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." addition. 8 .S.

5. " b o r n on A m e r i c a n citizens. 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. S e c . that evidence The lies U. C o n s t i t u t i o n r e q u i r e s citizen. 1. Or armed f o r c e 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 . whether he meets t h e o f President as natural-born citizen. U. C l . 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. 9 . "natural-born" Sec.ARGUMENT INTRODUCTION A gnawing indeed question vexes t h e Alabama body p o l i t i c and Obama. 5 o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n . A r t i c l e t h e U. C o n s t i t u t i o n . S. 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." 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. 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 . 1. t h e Commander i n C h i e f o f leader o f t h e Free high World.S. a mere " c i t i z e n . Although a President be a II.S. C l .

In an e f f o r t to resolve this persistent question two Mr. 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 . 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. 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. Obama h a s p r o d u c e d birth the certificates. accordingly. are left with the dismissing assumption averments t h e case. 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. these points 10 . therefore. i n turn. 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. The question. 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. i n Chapman's m o t i o n address to dismiss.

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

Coady v. 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 . (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 . D. In the u n l i k e l y case moot. as shown i n t h e 12 . was h e l d . " a n u n r e p o r t e d s i n g l e . 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. No. 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. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole. v. 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 . 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 .take the proper legal actions. 2 0 0 1 . case. 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 . i f n o t most s t a t e s . The e x c e p t i o n s a r e b y many. 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. 598 M.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 .

Commonwealth C o u r t E x c e p t i o n 2. D. t h a t can. case such t o be i n s e r i o u s doubt. Pennsylvania Questions of Board of of great public Probation No. Parole. where the l e g i t i m a c y of at been determined question Moreover. 2-09-0472. Ogilvie. Pennsylvania M.. Stephen No.S. 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. and 598 but importance. Capable of 394 U. and i s without will this a complaint we need probably than the recur. Second In re: A p p e l l a t e Court Illinois. 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. 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.E x c e p t i o n 1. The present and 1: case falls under each of moot: involves a question question of and of of the three named exceptions. evading E x c e p t i o n 3. 2001. government. J. review. Moore v. 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 . repetition 814. Coady v. District. A p a r t y would s u f f e r of a detriment.

SEC v. 4 0 3 ( 1 9 7 2 ) . 14 .S. Inc. Zwickler.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. case. 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. 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.S. f o r harm Thus happen every the p o t e n t i a l cycle. 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. Munsingwear. Exception y e t avoiding review. 3 4 0 U. f o r t h em a j o r i t y . 394 U. 404 U. t h a t he a presidential candidate. 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 . Medical committee for Human Rights. legitimate himself was c a n d i d a t e s were Goode. 36 1 9 5 0 ) . 1 0 2 ( 1 9 6 9 ) . 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.. United States v. election was h o n e s t . Golden v. s h o u l d be a s s u r e d candidate. Wade i n w h i c h said i n part: Blackmun. 3: W i t h o u t suffer will a decision of the court. 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.S.

a s h e r e . I f t h a t t e r m i n a t i o n makes a c a s e moot. 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. i t w i l l a l w a y s be w i t h u s . 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 . I t was o b v i o u s l y B u t . Bennett ( A p p e n d i x B) i s Secretary that instructive. 1 1 3 . 166 (1973). 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 . t h e n o r m a l 2 6 6 . be moot. y e t e v a d i n g r e v i e w " Roe v. abortion not the case case i t would to grant withstanding. since that i t involves the Allen and an e l e c t i o n of State i s past. 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 . 410 U. 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. particularly of State the case v. 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 . as seen and i n an o r d i n a r y too late above. 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 . applied the mootness exceptions and heard o f Allen In Alabama. 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 . her relief. 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 . Our l a w s h o u l d n o t be t h a t r i g i d .S. 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. Wade. the f o r the court the court case. election I t was a r g u e d was o v e r .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.B u t when.

valid this case i s not moot i t qualifies exceptions to the mootness doctrine. . 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. 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 . 823 S o .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 . Bennett. we h o l d t h a t . Yet elections happen e v e r y the p o t e n t i a l cycle. l a w do election Secretary activities" of (Code o f A l a . address turn: 1. 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. t h i s c a s e i s n o t m o o t . ) Allen v. 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. Next. 2 d 679 ( A l a b a m a 2001) As i s true would by analogy in this case. ( I t a l i c s a d d e d . § under 16 State's duties Alabama . elections for The not official Secretary of and shall "chief the state provide uniform guidance 17-1-3 ( a ) ) . . 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.

of "legal duty" were t h e absolute compulsion criterion only in f o r a person performing her duty. 1 9 9 8 . 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. 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 . 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. u n d e r t h e h e a d i n g o f CONCLUSION. i n the form as she seems t o a r g u e . 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 .provide If an e x c u s e f o r her inaction. the case o f an e l e c t e d official. Attorney G e n e r a l ' s O p i n i o n No. 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. argument. as h e r e . c o r r u p t i o n would grind to a rampant. certainly it her doing i s the right t o do. especially be halt.2 0 0 . 1998-200.

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 . the request County A r i z o n a . Secretary i ti s not novel t o not only 18 n o r uncommon f o r a investigate the of State . a l s o E x h i b i t D) Further. legal or otherwise. a s c l a i m e d b y t h e W h i t e House. A f f i d a v i t o f J o s e p h M. place or circumstances of Barack Obama's b i r t h . a n d h i s S o c i a l S e c u r i t y number. i t cannot be used as a v e r i f i c a t i o n . 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. Most i m p o r t a n t l y . of the date. ( I t a l i c s added.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. and therefore. A r p a i o . A r p a i o . 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. J o s e p h M. 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 . 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 . 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 . 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. 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 . 8. 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 . C 1 9 . 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 . 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 . 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.

In a l e t t e r t o Jack Weinberg (Chairman. J a c k W e i n b e r g . where One s u c h i n 1968 i n C a l i f o r n i a . (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. because 19 and refused t o old. ( I t a l i c s added. L i n d s a y . 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 . the Secretary of State to put issued ballot.. of State Cleaver California that F r a n k M. 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 .) Likewise. 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. 1 9 6 8 g e n e r a l e l e c t i o n ballot. place r e j e c t e d Ms.eligibility of presidential candidates. h o w e v e r . Secretary primary Debra Bowen. 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. 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 . name o n t h e C a l i f o r n i a . S e p t e m b e r 18. h e r name o n t h e b a l l o t . t h a t M r . J o r d a n t o Mr. 1968. i n 2012. A p p e n d i x C. s h e was 27 y e a r s ..

the U. Contrary determine United to this assertion by Chapman. official to above. 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. at which 35 requires years of candidates President least 2. Constitution. for Article to be 2. i s no bar to a state In There States has official the the Constitution. certainly for a provision i s not of state enforce See Constitutional the unprecedented. 20 .S. 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. 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 .and §1. law as i s required as the enforce States and. as Alabama E l e c t i o n Constitutional discussed a United to provisions pertaining elections. to Secretary the as taken explicitly as support duty to United Alabama Constitution. elections Again. United State States chief P r e s i d e n t i a l Candidate. 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. she well i t i s her officer. 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 . an oath fact. not eligible under that age.

election The was the over Again. were p r o p e r l y c o u n t e d and reported. jurisdiction. 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. 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. 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. 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. upon the Court Secretary certainly citizens this subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiffs This State law. for President sought to Obama. do is a her have f a i l e d suit merely to join necessary that the parties. Chapman's argument 21 i s without . of the Nevertheless. court d i d not Therefore. contrary to Chapman's c o n t e n t i o n . 4. the candidates.3. lack here Court does not subject i s not the the matter question presented or whether the votes properly conducted. were q u a l i f i e d I f . whether Instead. t h e intervene approve Alabama case. of has State and the perpetrated Alabama. as appears probable.

However. w r i t was are still election. writ before the 2012 filed that the the as Plaintiffs brought general timely. continue issue the mootness. T h i s Case Is merits. 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. needs to capable resolved. 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 . Plaintiffs' Since c l a i m was f i l e d too their late. p r e s i d e n t i a l e l e c t i o n took place. of supra.5. this case meets each of one of which is the three conditions to render f o r nonmootness. 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. eligibility i n future of candidates will and the question an be of t o be issue election cycles. 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. any sufficient 22 . As discussed not Moot and S h o u l d Be D e c i d e d on its supra. i t nonmoot.

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.§ and p r a c t i c i n g attorneys. 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. 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 .Plaintiffs. and by t h e l e a d e r o f h i s Zullo. A r p a i o A f f i d a v i t . 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. 2 0 1 1 . t o r e c u r . " There birth i s strong technical submitted evidence of fraud i nthe Obama. 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 . Wade. a c r i t i c a l which i s presented answer question of statewide here from i s certain this Court. suit as move f o r w a r d therefore. i n Roe v. 2. a n d was c o m p r i s e d investigators 5(C35) enforcement Affidavit. Zullo 23 .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. County A r i z o n a . § 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.

(C 35) 2 012. {C36) circumstance of Barack Zullo's to. document a n a l y s i s a n d Adobe computer programs.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.§ 6. Zullo § 7. f r o m numerous e x p e r t s computer generated i n the areas documents. ( 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 t minimum. ( C 3 6 ) 24 . public a legal i s . the Cold Case Posse informed Sheriff In February Arpaio that there was l i k e l y forgery involved with the documents. § 1 1 . and comparisons w i t h other b i r t h r e c o r d s . Barack authentic. review of Hawaii s t a t e law. 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 . but not limited of forensic as w e l l as. i n f a c t . Affidavit. Hawaii Department o f H e a l t h numerous policies and procedures. " § 7. " conclusions and cannot be r e l i e d place and the date. typesetting. input "were b a s e d upon.

" birth records a r e h e l d by the Hawaii Department § 12 were (C37).com. Certificate: t o Be P r e s i d e n t .D. of their investigation. 25 . Corsi holds a Ph. "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. 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. 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.In t h e course investigators misleading officials what. §7 I d . C o r s i extensively utilized researched OBAMA a n d h i s p a s t . " 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.(C41) by "Where's t h e B i r t h is Not E l i g i b l e Dr. f r o m H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y and has Dr.D. the Cold Dr. ( C 4 0 ) a l l the research he c o n d u c t e d research. o r i g i n a l of Health.. as w e l l as any subsequent At Zullo's request. 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. C o r s i f l e w t o Phoenix. by t h e sworn and author Zullo's affidavit currently Dr. conclusions also supported o f Jerome Corsi. Ph.

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 . was m a n u f a c t u r e d electronically. 2 0 1 1 ." A r p a i o Affidavit. 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 . Corsi's research." § 8 I d .g e n e r a t e d document. 27. C o r s i .Dr. 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. 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 . 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." Dr. h i s S e l e c t i v e S e r v i c e Card. § 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 certificate. Corsi similarly concluded that "there are significant he was b o r n . and h i s S o c i a l S e c u r i t y Number. b y The W h i t e House.f o r m birth certificate c o m p u t e r . a n d h i s S o c i a l S e c u r i t y Number. 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 . private.

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

include income t a x e s .(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. h i s progeny. each year numerous real he is owes.719 f o r e v e r y man. 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. See http://www. woman.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/population/cbll -215. M c l n n i s h States. 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 311.6 million. 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. w h i c h and typically taxes. state's honest a clear legal to have duties a chief elections officer i n furtherance perform her to ensure stable. Further. o r g / I n J u l y 2011. u s d e b t c l o c k . elections of m a i n t a i n i n g constitutional government. sales among o t h e r s . the burdened w i t h Mclnnish lawful.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. general he He is a o f Alabama and who voted a l l the registered voter He pays i n the election. 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. See h t t p : / / w w w .census. 28 . debt. right property.7 trillion. and c h i l d .^ estate taxes.

election contest States. Code o f A l a .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. 566 F. 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 .N. § 17-1-3 ( a ) ) . 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 .H. 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. candidates case. 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. 1975 §17of the Secretary of t h a t she 14-20. 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. 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 . to perform.Supp. e t s e q .2d 63. i n t h e S t a t e o f A l a b a m a . McCain. 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. and t h e p r i n t i n g of b a l l o t s .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. See H o l l a n d e r v.

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.I. those who statute clearly who implies that not seek o f f i c e not are nor qualified.. Further.." listed. c l . o f 1 9 0 1 . 30 . X V I . even p e r m i t t e d .) "[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 . those entitled then certified their respective parties. 1. they are appropriate are otherwise general provided seek. s o l e m n l y s w e a r ( o r a f f i r m . 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 . t o have ballot.. and such their persons names on are the entitled. 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 ..g. t o t h e b e s t o f my a b i l i t y . C o n s t .) e. § 2 7 9 . 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 . 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. So h e l p me God." A l a . but purpose. q u a l i f i e d f o r the (Those so by office (Emphasis added. Secretary shall be of Ala. a r t . 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 .

oath C o n s t i t u t i o n . exclusive. 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 . of t o be eligible As Office United States. m i g h t be (1892). 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. l e g i t i m a t e prima and by that the such as f a c i e . which to uphold." The McPherson not Blacker. The taken an U. Supreme C o u r t of the State to ". 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. 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.. 35 excluded. 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 .. but these legitimate allowed on should ballot state's chief elections official.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. influence 1.S.

(1958). under the Alabama C o n s t i t u t i o n . Constitution the S t a t e o f Alabama.S." and 19'?5 i n view §17-9-3. State Alabama. 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. 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. Rico State of performance to and Brown Cooper v. 5 U. Education. 358 U. must. she In swore of o f f i c e .S. Madison.. person I f the to run 32 Secretary of Office ineligible f o r the . 294 Board v. of course. Code i n law supra.S. s u p p o r t . of instructions codified of c o n t a i n e d i n A l a . . would be obey the Constitution. to her Marbury oath v. i t may 349 1 compelled refer (1955). suffice to U. duties.Branstad. allows an 483 a t 228..judicial fidelity (or review. Aaron. acting on b e h a l f of the U.... would-be about concerning his qualifications office The of "It S e c r e t a r y of State.S. supra. 137." Puerto V.S. would i n which the a f f i r m e d ) t h a t she of the ". 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. . U.

States i t w o u l d be This in direct be Constitution. during which meeting of State. 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 . govern only be an elected for those does not t h a t may contested.S. in Secretary Thompson. 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. Yet with of of the the United U. Appellant visited Mclnnish. 2012. Code § O f f i c e of 17-16-44 States.S. A l a . and of This mention federal office. President further specifically the United does mention the Ala. thus v i o l a t i n g Alabama C o n s t i t u t i o n s . absence of her office State. candidate. statute allows as w e l l as statute challenges elected not to to a l l Alabama the any judiciary state officers. offices seq. 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 . the together the his attorney of O f f i c e of the Hon. i n the state. of Emily the that Deputy and Secretary speaking State.President violation allowed. provides: 33 . 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. others. outcome cannot on February and 2.

34 office being . 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 . of the 1975 and for a contest States. 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. 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. conduct. State i s the to sole the the government o f f i c i a l name o f ballot. the violating highest this a namely land. 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 . 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 . election President United Moreover. 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 . w o u l d mean s h e the U. 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. C o n s t i t u t i o n .S. 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.

(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. 51 So. or r e s u l t s o f a n y e l e c t i o n . A l a . 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 . ( A l a . 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 . . 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 . Bar This Action. " In the case of Rice v.g. 1975 35 §17-16-44. Code 1975. C o d e 1975 official Secretary of t o cause happen. 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. Ex parte CollinSr 84 t o A l a . 2010). what e v e r y permit. C o d e 1975 3d 48. 4. conduct. State i s the I t i s to produce §32-6-8(b) a n d that to A l a . Code 1975 The §17-16-44 Does Not A l a . 50 So. 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. Chapman.But remedy.

the s o . 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. 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. 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 . " and t o hear the lawsuit. i t i s only the proceedings conduct. Thus. Rather results o f an e l e c t i o n . 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. 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. §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. actions. or results that entertain the t h a t §17- Yet "legality. U n l i k e Rice. 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. 16-44 o f any e l e c t i o n " this lawsuit prevents.

for the i n i t s d e m a n d s made on of the United a candidate President States. for a Writ granting be Petitioner's request o f Mandamus i t w i l l 37 . joins any a troop. sleight an hand w i t h software. 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. documents. 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. S. a teenager an were l e f t a birth unresolved certificate. computer words. American f o r want As of which heart Constitutional the simplest of Government. applying bona learner's birth he must submit The original. certificate. 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. Further Constitution office of § 17-16-44 does not preempt the U.this l a w s u i t and this l a w s u i t i s not barred by that statute. for a fide explained license supra.

requested. will E i t h e r a bone fide birth certificate will be not t o produced. commonplace no a birth certificate. simply exist. there i s A maxim o f e q u i t y a remedy. requires a very however. 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. investigation. admitting Petitioners. 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.resolved. 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 . 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. State have been answered. purportedly thing: I t merely the production ordinary. already exists. w o u l d be to Should wrong the Court not issue the w r i t here o f Alabama. 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. As r e c o u n t e d explained means. he among seeks to Branch. 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. 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. others c o n s t i t u t e the J u d i c i a l Branch. citizens of maintained. most questions ballot stilled. 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.

S u i t e B H u n t s v i l l e . not without some that their justification. 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. a n d d o t h e same f o r a l l elections. P r C . i ^ n s o n \ (JOH046} L. 4030 B a l m o r a l D r . result. 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 . . this society grievously. n e t 39 . l 7 D e a n . 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 .the President of the United Uncorrected. 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. certified f o r any c a n d i d a t e not responding s h o u l d be decertified. this would States. candidates 2 0 1 2 . 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.

Alabama 36130 40 . 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. 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. F l e m i n g J a m e s W. L u t h e r S t r a n g e . 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 . Esq. 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 . NW. 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 . S u i t e 800 W a s h i n g t o n . 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. D a v i s L a u r a 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 following: Hon.L a r r y Klayman.

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

No. 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 . 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 .LIST OF APPENDICES Attorney Allen General's Opinion No.

F l e m i n g James W.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 . 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. L u t h e r S t r a n g e . 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 . 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. 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. D a v i s L a u r a E.

A G O 1998-200.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 . Box 5616 Montgomery.1 6 . within 4 5 d a y s after the s e c o n d primary election. that a c a n d i d a t e h a s not met a certifying qualification.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 .O. 1998-200 A u g u s t 12. A G O 1998-200. 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. Alabama Attorney General Opinions 1998. 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. Bennett.C a n d i d a t e s .4 0 of the C o d e of Alabama? FACTS AND ANALYSIS S e c t i o n 1 7 . D e a r Mr.Ballots . 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 . certify to the probate judge of e a c h county in the state a Appendix A 1 of 4 . 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. 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 .1 6 . 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. A l a b a m a 36103 Secretary of S t a t e .

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 . C O D E § 1716. 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. G . 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 . A L A . 1998. 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 . C O D E § 36-25-15(c) ( S u p p . Similarly. A L A . 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. 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 . 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. 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. C O D E § 17-7-1 (a)(3) (1995). N o . . 9 8 0 0 1 9 4 . s i x d a y s after the s e c o n d primary e l e c t i o n . 1997). 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 . to be voted for by the voters of s u c h county. the S e c r e t a r y of State s h o u l d not certify the candidate. N o . in the c a s e of an officer to be voted for by the electors of the w h o l e state. 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. .0 0 2 2 3 .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). not later than 4 5 d a y s after the s e c o n d primary. 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.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. 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). 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 . A . section 1 7 . S o m e of the qualifications.m.1 5 ( S u p p . e x c e p t n o m i n e e s for c o u n t y offices. S e c t i o n 17.4 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). 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.1 6 . F o r e x a m p l e . 9 0 . G . 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. dated J u l y 2 9 . 1997). C O D E § 17-7-1 (c) (1995). h o w e v e r . C O D E § 3 6 . 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. 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 . H a n d . . 1 9 9 0 .4 0 (1995). A L A . 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. A L A . certify to the probate judge of e a c h county in the state. dated April 19.2 5 . 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 . A L A .

& CONCLUSION A s stated a b o v e . 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. 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. C O D E § 17-7-1 (a)(1) & (2) (1995). QUESTION 4 Appendix A 3 of 4 . 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 . ANALYSIS. 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. QUESTION 3 If the a n s w e r to q u e s t i o n #1 is in the affirmative. 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. 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. M o r e o v e r . 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 . m a s s m e e t i n g .1(a)(3). 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. 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 . 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 . convention. ANALYSIS. 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 the candidate. 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. & CONCLUSION A s stated a b o v e . that a c a n d i d a t e h a s not met a certifying qualification. See A L A . 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. QUESTION 2 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 . 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 . 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 .

S O L O M O N .98/M Appendix A 4 of 4 . p l e a s e contact B r e n d a F. Chief. 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. this question n e e d not be a d d r e s s e d . & CONCLUSION A s stated in q u e s t i o n 3. therefore. O p i n i o n s D i v i s i o n BP/WBM B7. 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 . Sincerely. ANALYSIS. S m i t h of m y staff. 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.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. If this Office c a n be of further a s s i s t a n c e . J R . BILL P R Y O R Attorney G e n e r a l By: J A M E S R.

December 28. 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. 1 9 9 9 . Supreme Court of A l a b a m a . . L . . 1 9 9 9 . p l a c e no. a s S e c r e t a r y of State of the State of A l a b a m a . r e s i g n e d . for appellant. A g r i c o l a . J i m Bennett. d e c l a r i n g . g e n . 2001) Jim Bennett. for A p p e l l e e s S e c r e t a r y of state. 1. g e n . Bennett P a g e 679 823 So. Jr.. V. 2 d 6 7 9 (Ala. J o r d a n . .8 2 3 S o . B R O W 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 . Ratliff & Brandt. Bill Pryor. L . P a g e 680 J o s e p h W . as Secretary of State of the State of Alabama. O n D e c e m b e r 1. 1 9 9 2 2 8 9 .attys. 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. for a p p e l l e e don Bervill. A l l e n v. 1992289. 2 0 0 1 ) . creating a v a c a n c y in the office of district court j u d g e . C . J r . Clliford III. 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 . Appendix B 1 of 8 . asst. Nelson Allen. M o n t g o m e r y . J u d g e W a r r e n Laird. . 2001. 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. W e affirm. a n d C h a r l e s Brinsfield C a m p h e l l a n d William P . a m o n g other things. in W a l k e r C o u n t y . atty. 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. J a s p e r . a n d Bevill w a s s w o r n in on D e c e m b e r 1. Algert S . Justice. of W a l l a c e .2d 679 (Ala. H u d s o n .

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. with neither receiving m o r e than 5 0 % of the v o t e s . stating 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 . therefore. 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 . 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. J u d g e Bevill's term of office would expire on J a n u a r y 15. . T h e m e m o r a n d u m c o n c l u d e d that. W a l k e r C o u n t y w a s o n e of those counties. 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. b e p l a c e d on the 2 0 0 0 election ballot. O n J u l y 7. Att'y G e n . S e e O p . 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. J u d g e Bevill. C o d e 1 9 7 5 . p l a c e no. but instead w o u l d expire in J a n u a r y 2 0 0 3 . 2 0 0 0 . h o w e v e r .e l e c t i o n ballot. H o w e v e r . 2 0 0 0 . A l l e n . pursuant to 6. expire in J a n u a r y 2 0 0 1 .1 6 . T h e two then met in a run-off e l e c t i o n . the n a m e s of Bevill. 2 0 0 0 . held o n J u n e 2 7 . 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 . 2 0 0 0 . a s the A O C h a d o p i n e d . 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 . in fact. by A u g u s t 13. 2 0 0 0 . s h o u l d .'^''^ P u r s u a n t to 17-7-1 (c) a n d 1 7 . A l l e n w o n the run-off. 2 0 0 1 . 2 0 0 0 .O n M a r c h 28. 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. 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. 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 .4 0 . 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.14 of A m e n d m e n t N o . 1. 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. In the m e a n t i m e . J u d g e Bevill's term of office w o u l d not. a n d that. 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. the attorney g e n e r a l i s s u e d an opinion.1 5 9 (2000). J i m W e l l s . J u d g e Bevill w a s not required to run for office in the 2 0 0 0 election. w h i c h w a s s c h e d u l e d for J u n e 6. A l a . a n d the ballots w e r e printed. 1. A l l e n . a n d a third p e r s o n . 2 0 0 0 . 2 0 0 0 . 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 . Shortly after the m e m o r a n d u m w a s i s s u e d . 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 . O n M a y 30. 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 . 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 . p l a c e no. 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. S u b s e q u e n t l y . N o . u n d e r the pertinent constitutional p r o v i s i o n s . 3 2 8 to the A l a b a m a Constitution of 1901 a n d other pertinent constitutional provisions.

citing V. H o w e v e r . however. other t h a n a probate j u d g e . A judge. w a s not o n t h e ballot. a s the winner of the primary election. 2 0 0 0 . or as may be otherwise in S h e l b y . the a p p e a l s h o u l d be d i s m i s s e d .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 . the circuit court entered its judgment. 1. C l a i r county shall be filled as provided hereafter adopted. P i c k e n s .14 of A m e n d m e n t N o . 8 1 6 (1969). T a l l a p o o s a . 4 1 2 n. S e c t i o n 6. 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. M a d i s o n . S . Walker. S e c t i o n 6. W a s h i n g t o n . E t o w a h . 2 d 4 1 1 .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 . (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 . 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. 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. accordingly. (2) that. or is r e m o v e d . J u d g e Bevill's term of office a s district court judge. 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. d e c l a r i n g (1) that. G r e e n 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. 8 1 4 . T h e parties stipulated to the facts of the c a s e . 1. retires. 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. O n a p p e a l . Vacancies judicial office shall be filled by appointment by the governor. II. therefore. W a l k e r C o u n t y . r e s i g n s . 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.4 ( A l a . pursuant to 6. 7 1 0 S o . III. W i l c o x . T u s c a l o o s 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. M o n r o e . w e hold that the interpretation of 6. p l a c e no. in the Constitution established by a properly law.14 of A m e n d m e n t N o . C l a r k e . 1998). Ogilvie. p l a c e no. 394 U .14 of A m e n d m e n t N o . 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 . for the aforementioned r e a s o n s . 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. H e n r y . 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 . a n d (4) that. appointed to fill a vacancy shall serve an initial term Appendix B 3 of 8 . p l a c e no. S e e Griggs v. o n the N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 0 g e n e r a l election ballot. Bennett. 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 . 1. 3 2 8 of the A l a b a m a Constitution of 1 9 0 1 . of 1901 with amendments advertised and enacted now or local C o n e c u h . O n A u g u s t 9.

a n d with it 158. 1997). 7 0 3 S o . w e h a v e s t a t e d .^"^^ S e e Hornsby v. his interpretation violated the principles of constitutional construction. 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 . 3 2 8 . of w h i c h 6. 2 d at 9 3 9 . the court s a i d ." (Emphasis added.) T h e proviso in the s e c o n d s e n t e n c e of 6. r e p e a l e d Article VI.1 0 (Ala. " Hornsby. certified a s the D e m o c r a t i c Party's candidate. 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. Sessions.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. 2 d N o . N o t h i n g in the l a n g u a g e of 6. 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.e l e c t i o n ballot. 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. like J u d g e Bevill. a s he did in the circuit court. 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. 1980) (noting that 6.^^^ 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 . 9 3 9 ( A l a . 3 2 8 . including W a l k e r C o u n t y . 3 2 8 . Bevill's term w a s d u e to expire o n J a n u a r y 15. J u d g e Bevill's term of office is g o v e r n e d by 158. 2 0 9 . a s A l l e n urges.14 b e c a u s e . 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 . 7 0 3 S o . it s a i d ." "In s e a r c h i n g for the proper construction of a constitutional provision. S e c t i o n 158.14 of A m e n d m e n t N o . A l l e n ' s interpretation." 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 .14 applies to judicial v a c a n c i e s in s e v e r a l specifically listed counties.14. A m e n d m e n t N o . A m e n d m e n t v. If. H o w e v e r . controls in this state. 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 . s u p r a . Siegelman.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. 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 .14 is a part.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. u p o n w h i c h A l l e n relies. 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 . 2 0 0 1 .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 . with A l l e n . T h u s .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. 2 d 9 3 2 . 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 6.14 h a s specifically r e p l a c e d 158). A l i e n a r g u e s . a s the w i n n e r of the D e m o c r a t i c Party primary. 386 S o . w h i c h a m e n d m e n t . "would h a v e the court read b a c k into 6. U n d e r the g e n e r a l provision of 6. 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. Id. S e e Hooper 2 0 7 .

Appendix B 5 of 8 ." T h e l a n g u a g e that follows that g e n e r a l provision in 6. like A l l e n . 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." 6.by appointment by the governor. 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 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. T h e r e is nothing in the third s e n t e n c e of 6.'-^-' the third s e n t e n c e of 6.14 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. 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. W e held that a strict construction of the proviso in 6. A l t h o u g h the appellants in Griggs.14. 7 1 0 S o . the proviso in 6.14.14) a n d H o u s t o n C o u n t y (a county not listed in the proviso).14 is dictated by its l a n g u a g e .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 .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.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. "implicitly a c c e p t e d " his interpretation of 6. T h e proviso in the s e c o n d s e n t e n c e of 6. T h i s construction of 6. 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. w h i c h i n c l u d e s the p r o v i s o . 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. required to s t a n d for election.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 .14. 2 d 411 (Ala.14. A l l e n a r g u e s that this C o u r t in Griggs v.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. 1998). 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 . 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. 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. Bennett. 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 . 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 .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.

2 d 2 0 7 . A l l e n s a y s . ' "(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 . 2 d 6 1 . the application of w h i c h is in doubt. w h o usually m u s t h a v e k n o w l e d g e of the facts. or s i l e n c e . c o n d u c t . v. 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 . 3 8 6 S o . Siegelman. ' 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.. Electric Credit Corp. 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. 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 .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 . 7 1 0 S o . he s a y s . 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 . quoting General Co. 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 . J u d g e Bevill is not required to stand for election until the 2 0 0 2 election. w h o l a c k s k n o w l e d g e of the facts. w e took no position in that c a s e on the continued viability of 1 5 8 . " Griggs. [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 . 6 4 ( A l a . 1996).'" Lambert v. 2 d 1 2 4 0 . Strickland T h i s Court h a s h e l d : Div. 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 . 1980). either by w o r d s . " W h e n a court is interpreting a proviso. relies upon [the] c o m m u n i c a t i o n . IV. " 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 . 2 0 9 . 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 . 1243 ( A l a . 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. 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 . 6 8 2 S o .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. 4 3 7 S o . 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. this C o u r t h a s previously r e c o g n i z e d that 6. A c c o r d i n g l y . Mail Handlers Benefit Plan. 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 d at 4 1 3 .1 0 (Ala. T h u s . 1983). S e e Hooper v.

4 3 2 S o . W o o d a l i . Jr.) 176 F .0 5 (Ala. S e e . 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. . 2 d 1 2 0 2 . 7 0 7 . is not s u p p o s e d to be h e l d . l a n g u a g e . Inc. H a r w o o d . l a n g u a g e .. 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. 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. v.. Ex parte Fields. quoting v. must be predicated u p o n the conduct. A l a . equitable e s t o p p e l . ' " U n d e r the settled law.' estoppel is not a barto the correction." Outdoor Adver. 7 7 S . Headrick 3 5 3 U . of a mistake of law. a n d Stuart. H o u s t o n . 1 L . Dep't v.. Notes: C h a r l e s R. J J . 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. S u p p . 7 6 8 ( M .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 . 1959). 1 2 0 4 . S . 7 0 9 . 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 .'" 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]. S t e p h e n s . at 7 7 2 . S u p p . 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 . The representation must be as to the facts and not as to the law. 5 9 4 S o . 1992). 2 d 1290 ( A l a . E d . L y o n s . F o r the r e a s o n s s t a t e d a b o v e . Commissioner.2d 123 (5th Cir.. 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 . 176 F . S a i d conduct.. 1961).. the circuit court's j u d g m e n t is d u e to be. First Nat'l Bank of Montgomery 1983). H o w e v e r . . under the pertinent p r o v i s i o n s of the A l a b a m a Constitution. 1 district court j u d g e s h i p . 180. he s a y s . Appendix B 7 of 8 . United States. c o n c u r . 182. a n d is h e r e b y . J o h n s t o n e . . 2 d 7 4 6 (1957). affirmed. 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.. 2 8 5 F. D . afTd. AFFIRMED.. C t . 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 .

110 to the A l a b a m a Constitution of 1 9 0 1 . S i n c e the e n a c t m e n t of 6. a n d a m e n d m e n t s 3 1 7 a n d 3 2 3 thereof. N o . A s the attorney g e n e r a l stated in O p . s u c h a s a judicial nominating c o m m i s s i o n .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 .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 . 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 . Appendix B 8 of 8 . 6 1 5 to the A l a b a m a Constitution of 1 9 0 1 . 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 . 6 0 7 . Att'y G e n . a n d N o . 8 3 a n d N o . T h u s . . 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 . 4 0 8 . " A m e n d m e n t s N o . 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 0 7 . or c h a n c e l l o r s of this state. 8 3 .1 5 9 (2000). a n alternate appointment process. N o . N o . 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 . 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 .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 . 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 . M o b i 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. 6.14 "allows the n a m e d counties to retain the flexibility to provide. N o . for e x a m p l e . 3 3 4 . by local law. S e e A m e n d m e n t s N o . 8 3 a n d N o .14.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. 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 . 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 m e n d m e n t s N o ." ^^•I T h e p r e a m b l e to A m e n d m e n t N o . 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[. 2 0 0 0 . shall be filled by appointment by the governor.]" S e c t i o n 6. 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 . a n d N o .

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

The Cold Case posse agreed to undertake the investigation requested by the 250 citizens of Maricopa County. 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. 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. being first duly sworn. The Maricopa County Sheriff s Office is in a rather unique position. can authorize an investigation go forward to answer these questions at virtually noexpense to the-tax payer. 2. to assist me in the execution of my duties. 4. ) AFFIDAVIT I. located in the county. as the Sheriff of the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office. This posse consists of former police officers and attorneys who have worked investigating the controversy surrounding Barack Obama. I am oyer the age of 18 and am a resident of Arizona. I am the duly elected Sheriff of Maricopa County. I have the authority to request the aid of the volunteer posse. 3. The investigation mainly focused on the electronic document that was II Appendix D 1 of 2 . up until that point. the undersigned.000 members. i f called as a witness. In August of last year.State of Arizona County of Maricopa ) ) ss. for 51 years. This group expressed its concern that. as the elected Sheriff of Maricopa County. and. in both state and federal government. The information contained in this affidavit is based upon my own personal knowledge. Arizona. 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. citing lack of resources and jurisdictional challenges. Having organized a volunteer posse of approximately 3. 5. could testify competently thereto. Under the Arizona Constitution and Arizona Revised Statutes. I. do hereby state under oath and under penalty of perjury that the facts are true: 1. and I have been a law enforcement officer and official.

LYNDA JEMSEMORBM Notw Piittlo. was manufactured electronically. may have been imported from another unknown source document. and his Social Security number. Maricopa County Sheriff Sworn to and subscribed me this 3S9'iDea before b 1 ^ day of 2012. the "registrar's stamp" in the computer generated document released by the White House and posted on the White House website. Upon close examination of the evidence. 9. As soon as that information has been properly verified by the Cold Case Posse.birth certificate is a computer-generated document. The Cold Case Posse law enforcement investigation into Barack Obama's birth certificate and his eligibility to be president is on-going. I will release that information to the public. legal or otherwise. M y investigators and I believe that President Obama's. 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 on-going nature of the investigation is due to additional information that has come to light sinpe we held the press conference in March. 7. Executed this / p day of June. 201 Maricopa County. as claimed by the White House. 2012. of the date.long-form. and that it did not originate in a paper format. his Selective Service Registration card. and therefore. it is my belief that forgery andfiraudwas likely committed in key identity documents including President Obama's longform birth certificate.2011. Arpaio.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. 8. Most importantly. 6. it cannot be used as a verification.aittB ofArim MAMOOMOOUNTV MV v D n i W t M n Kni^^ Appendix D 2 of 2 . Arizona. place or circumstances of Barack Obama's birth. Joseph M . 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.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.