Case No.

1120465

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

HUGH MCINNISH, e t a l . , A^ellan-ts

V.

BETH CHAPMAN, SECRETARY OF STATE, al. J^pellees.

APPEAL FRCAf THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MONTGCfflRY COUNTY CV 2012-1053 BRIEF OF AMICUS CX7RIAE UNITED STATES JUSTICE FOXnVDATION

NATHANIEL OLESON (CA #276695) UNITED STATES JUSTICE FOUNDATION 932 D S t r e e t , S t e . 2 Ramona, C a l i f o r n i a 92065 T e l : (760) 788-6624 Fax: (760) 788-6414 E m a i l : nathan@usjfmail.net Counsel f o r amicus curiae United S t a t e s J u s t i c e Foundation

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES STATEMENT OF INTEREST SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ARGUMENT I . QUESTIONS OF E L I G I B I L I T Y ARE NOT P O L I T I C A L QUESTIONS, BECAUSE THE P O L I T I C A L CANDIDATES AND/OR P O L I T I C A L PARTIES, MAY HAVE AN INTEREST IN APPROVING A NON-ELIGIBLE CANDIDATE II. THE QUESTION OF V E R I F Y I N G THE E L I G I B I L I T Y OF A CANDIDATE FOR THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, I F LEFT UNRESOLVED, COULD L I K E L Y RESULT I N MORE I N E L I G I B L E PERSONS SEEKING THE OFFICE, AND RECURRING L I T I G A T I O N OVER THE ISSUE THE ALABAMA SECRETARY OF STATE HAS THE STATUTORY DUTY TO V E R I F Y THE E L I G I B I L I T Y FOR A L L CANDIDATES FOR OFFICE WHO SEEK PLACEMENT ON THE BALLOT 2 3 4 5 5

11

III.

13 17

CONCLUSION

TABLE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

OF

AUTHORITIES

U.S. U.S.

Constitution Article Constitution Article

2 5

15,16,17 6

FEDERAL STATUTES

3 U.S.C. 15
FEDERAL CASES

Baker

v. C a r r

(1962) 369 U.S. 186 (1968) 393 U.S. 8 1 0 , 89 S . C t . 43 (AK, 1942) 163 S.W.2d 512

9 15 8,9,10

C l e a v e r v. Jordan Irby V. Barrett

ALABAMA STATUTES

Alabama's

E l e c t i o n Code 17-1-3 (a)

13

OTHER STATE STATUTES

C a l i f o r n i a Government

Code 12172

15

BRIEF IN

OF AMICUS

CURIAE

SUPPORT O F

PETITIONER

STATEMENT

OF

INTEREST

The

United States Justice

Foundation

("USJF") i s a

nonprofit public interest, to instruct,

legal action organization dedicated litigate,

i n f o r m and educate t h e p u b l i c on, and t o legal

significant

i s s u e s c o n f r o n t i n g A m e r i c a . F o u n d e d i n 1979 b y i n the

a t t o r n e y s s e e k i n g t o advance t h e c o n s e r v a t i v e v i e w p o i n t judicial arena, USJF h a s s i n c e s u b m i t t e d Supreme C o u r t testimony appointee,

t o t h e U.S. sponsored

S e n a t e on v i r t u a l l y e v e r y conferences

on a v a r i e t y o f i m p o r t a n t

legal

issues, published numerous

s t u d i e s a n d r e p o r t s on t o p i c a l C o n s t i t u t i o n a l cases, The and

i s s u e s , and l i t i g a t e d court.

i n c l u d i n g up t o t h i s

i s s u e o f whether t h e S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e has t h e duty

r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o i n v e s t i g a t e and v e r i f y e l i g i b i l i t y o f s e e k i n g t o h a v e t h e i r names p l a c e d on t h e b a l l o t i s of great concern t o Amicus,

candidates

regardless of party a f f i l i a t i o n , because, i f d e t e r m i n a t i o n s

of the e l i g i b i l i t y

of candidates f o r

the o f f i c e o f P r e s i d e n t o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s a r e l e f t t o political will candidates, and/or t o t h e p o l i t i c a l who c l e a r l y being fail parties, then this

lead t o candidates

t o meet t h e simply

requirements

of e l i g i b i l i t y ,

elected to office

b e c a u s e o f t h e i r p o p u l a r i t y . As a r e s u l t , clear determination with regards

t h e r e n e e d s t o be a of State

as t o t h e d u t i e s o f t h e S e c r e t a r y

t o p l a c i n g names on t h e b a l l o t .

S U M M A R Y OF ARGUMENT

BECAUSE OF THE UNITED STATES, THE

IMPORTANCE OF THE O F F I C E OF PRESIDENT

OF

THE

IMPORTANT QUESTION OF WHETHER THE ALABAMA PRESIDENTIAL BE MAY IF

SECRETARY OF STATE HAS A DUTY TO INVESTIGATE A

CANDIDATE'S QUALIFICATIONS, OR WHETHER SUCH QUESTIONS CAN LEFT TO THE P O L I T I C A L PARTIES, SINCE THE HAVE AN INTEREST

P O L I T I C A L PARTIES,

IN APPROVING A NON-ELIGIBLE CANDIDATE, AND,

THIS ISSUE IS LEFT UNRESOLVED, IT COULD L I K E L Y RESULT IN MORE I N E L I G I B L E PERSONS SEEKING THE OFFICE AND AS A RESULT, RECURRING L I T I G A T I O N

ARGUMENT

I. QUESTIONS OF ELIGIBILITY ARE SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS

NOT

POLITICAL QUESTIONS,

AND

SUCH, BECAUSE POLITICAL BODIES, AND/OR INTEREST IN APPROVING A NON-

POLITICAL PARTIES, MAY ELIGIBLE CANDIDATE

HAVE AN

I t h a s been t h e o f t s t a t e d p o s i t i o n o f t h e v a r i o u s attorneys f o r Barack Hussein Obama, J r . , t h a t t h e c o u r t s h a v e no

role i n determining as.

w h e t h e r he i s e l i g i b l e

t o r u n f o r , and serve

President of the United

S t a t e s o f TVmerica, A c c o r d i n g t o

these

attorneys, only the e l e c t o r a t e , the Congress, the Democratic

E l e c t o r a l C o l l e g e , o r as was a r g u e d b y t h e A l a b a m a Party, p o l i t i c a l determination. p a r t i e s endorsing candidates

c a n make s u c h a

Federal law a l l o w s Congress t o r e s o l v e q u e s t i o n s the vote

regarding

o f a P r e s i d e n t i a l E l e c t o r (3 U.S.C. 1 5 ) , b u t t h i s i s

a remedy l i m i t e d t o p r o b l e m s w i t h E l e c t o r s , a n d d o e s n o t e x t e n d to for the e l i g i b i l i t y of a candidate, a s 3 U.S.C. 15 o n l y allows

o b j e c t i o n s r e g a r d i n g "any v o t e

o r paper from t h e S t a t e . " the e l i g i b i l i t y of Barack

Since t h i s a c t i o n i s a d i s p u t e over

Obama f o r t h e o f f i c e o f P r e s i d e n t o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , a n d n o t a d i s p u t e over whether t h e E l e c t o r s p r o p e r l y c a s t t h e i r this vote,

s t a t u t e d o e s n o t a p p l y t o t h e u n d e r l y i n g i s s u e a t hand. In a d d i t i o n , a p r o v i s i o n o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n may n o t be vote o f the people, as t h e r e

d i s r e g a r d e d b y means o f a p o p u l a r

are s p e c i f i c g u i d e l i n e s f o r amending 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 . I n o r d e r t o do s o , t h e U.S. C o n s t i t u t i o n , A r t i c l e 5, requires a two-thirds vote of both houses o f Congress, and i n the

r a t i f i c a t i o n by t h r e e - f o u r t h s o f a l l S t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e s U n i t e d S t a t e s . Even i f t h e p e o p l e e l e c t as P r e s i d e n t a c a n d i d a t e position,

of the United States voted t o f o r the

who d i d n o t q u a l i f y

t h a t v o t e w o u l d n o t be s u f f i c i e n t

t o overcome t h e

C o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r t h e o f f i c e a n d make t h a t candidate eligible. Once a name i s p l a c e d on a b a l l o t , voters over

a r e o n l y c o n c e r n e d w i t h w h e t h e r t h e y p r e f e r one c a n d i d a t e another candidate, a s i t c a n be r i g h t f u l l y i n f e r r e d by

said been

voters that the threshold issue of e l i g i b i l i t y d e t e r m i n e d by v i r t u e o f t h e c a n d i d a t e on t h e b a l l o t . A d d i t i o n a l l y , President of the United eligibility candidates

has a l r e a d y been

names h a v i n g

placed

the candidates

f o r the Office of

States

a r e n o t r e q u i r e d t o p r o v e any

i s s u e s t o t h e v o t e r s a t a l l , and, i n s t e a d , are tasked with convincing the voters t o vote f o r candidates. Because

that p a r t i c u l a r candidate v o t e r s c a n , a n d do, v o t e v o t e r s , even i f those position,

over the other f o r candidates

t h a t a r e l i k e d by t h e f o rthe

candidates

may n o t be e l i g i b l e

t h e v o t e r s do n o t h a v e t h e power, o r t h e r i g h t , t o of a candidate. For the Court t o hold not winning a

determine the e l i g i b i l i t y otherwise

w o u l d be t o s t r i p a l l c a n d i d a t e s cast of a l l p o l i t i c a l

m a j o r i t y of the votes

power, a s t h e l a w s rather

w o u l d be b a s e d upon t h e whims o f t h e m a j o r i t y o f v o t e r s , t h a n on t h e R u l e o f Law. Furthermore, the E l e c t o r a l C o l l e g e

i s n o t empowered w i t h o f any c a n d i d a t e f o r of Columbia,

the a u t h o r i t y t o determine the e l i g i b i l i t y President. In twenty-six

S t a t e s and t h e D i s t r i c t

P r e s i d e n t i a l E l e c t o r s a r e p r o h i b i t e d by s t a t u t e from v o t i n g i n variance with t h e i r pledges, or the votes of a majority of the

v o t e r s i n t h e i r S t a t e or D i s t r i c t , civil a n d / o r c r i m i n a l p e n a l t i e s and eligibility i s one

as,

i f t h e y do, The act

they of

face

fines.

determining authority,

that requires discretionary f o u n d t o be i n e l i g i b l e may be any

so t h a t a c a n d i d a t e

removed o r p r e c l u d e d

f r o m p l a c e m e n t on t h e b a l l o t .

However,

d i s c r e t i o n a r y a u t h o r i t y of the m a j o r i t y of the P r e s i d e n t i a l E l e c t o r s has b e e n r e m o v e d by

States' the function vote of the of

s t a t u t e , and

P r e s i d e n t i a l E l e c t o r s , i n s t e a d , perform of c a s t i n g t h e i r votes

a ministerial

i n accordance w i t h the popular

t h e S t a t e t h a t e a c h E l e c t o r r e p r e s e n t s . Any E l e c t o r a l C o l l e g e has

assertion that

t h e a u t h o r i t y t o make any eligibility to serve

determination

a P r e s i d e n t i a l candidate's unpersuasive,

i n the o f f i c e i s the

because, w h i l e the h i s t o r i c a l

i n t e n t of the of the of

E l e c t o r a l C o l l e g e was

t o a l l o w f o r such d e t e r m i n a t i o n s , States i s to l i m i t

modern m a j o r i t y t r e n d o f t h e the vote Presidential

the d u t i e s

E l e c t o r s t o the m i n i s t e r i a l c h o s e n by t h e p o p u l a r For these

r o l e of c a s t i n g a vote of the candidate's their

f o r the candidate

r e s p e c t i v e States or D i s t r i c t .

reasons, a

m i n i s t e r i a l power t o d e t e r m i n e a n d / o r e x c l u d e eligibility i s not found w i t h i n the E l e c t o r a l c o m m i t t e e s , and panels,

College. i n general, bodies such

P o l i t i c a l boards,

as t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s C o n g r e s s , a r e n o t p r o p e r determinations significant of e l i g i b i l i t y in this

f o r making the

s i t u a t i o n because of v.

r i s k o f " c o r r u p t and

p a r t i s a n a c t i o n " {Irhy

Barrett

(AK,

1942)

163

S,W.2d 512,

514).

Matters

committed

by

the C o n s t i t u t i o n to the n o n - j u d i c i a l branches of the Government a r e p o l i t i c a l U.S. 186, 211. i n nature. Baker v. Carr

Federal 369

(1962)

Thus, the O f f i c e o f P r e s i d e n t o f the to decide political

United manner,

States i s designed the United

i s s u e s . In l i k e

States Congress i s a p o l i t i c a l

b o d y w i t h t h e power t o

l e g i s l a t e p o l i t i c a l matters. p o w e r s , C o n g r e s s has o r remove t h e i r own eligibility United internal

In a d d i t i o n to i t s p o l i t i c a l rules concerning these r u l e s do whether to not extend seat to

members, b u t

of candidates

f o r the O f f i c e of P r e s i d e n t of the President

the are

S t a t e s . S i n c e b o t h t h e C o n g r e s s and any Congressional

p o l i t i c a l bodies,

authority to

determine

whether a c a n d i d a t e P r e s i d e n t w o u l d be on w h i c h p o l i t i c a l r e l a t e d i s s u e was held:

meets t h e suspect, p a r t y was

requirements f o r the O f f i c e of would depend A which

as t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n s

i n the m a j o r i t y at the time. by C o u r t i n Irby v. Barrett,

considered

" I f t h e C h a i r m a n and S e c r e t a r y o f t h e C o m m i t t e e h a v e t h e r i g h t t o say t h a t because of the d e c i s i o n of t h i s c o u r t p e t i t i o n e r i s i n e l i g i b l e t o be a c a n d i d a t e f o r o f f i c e , t h e y may a l s o s a y , i n any c a s e , t h a t f o r some o t h e r r e a s o n a c a n d i d a t e i s i n e l i g i b l e . F o r i n s t a n c e , i t has b e e n h e l d by t h i s c o u r t i n many e l e c t i o n c o n t e s t s t h a t one must pay h i s p o l l t a x ; t h a t he must do so a f t e r p r o p e r a s s e s s m e n t i n t h e t i m e and manner r e q u i r e d by l a w , and t h a t o t h e r w i s e he i s n o t e l i g i b l e e v e n t o v o t e , and u n l e s s he were a v o t e r he c o u l d n o t h o l d o f f i c e . So w i t h o t h e r q u a l i f i c a t i o n s , s u c h as r e s i d e n c e . May t h i s q u e s t i o n be c o n s i d e r e d o r d e c i d e d by t h e C h a i r m a n and S e c r e t a r y o f t h e C o m m i t t e e ? I t may be t h a t s u c h power c a n be c o n f e r r e d upon them by l a w s o f t h i s S t a t e

or t h e r u l e s o f t h e p a r t y ; b u t i t i s c e r t a i n t h a t t h i s has n o t y e t b e e n done. I f t h i s c a n be d o n e , a n d s h o u l d be done, t h e d o o r w o u l d be o p e n e d w i d e f o r c o r r u p t a n d p a r t i s a n a c t i o n . I t m i g h t be c e r t i f i e d t h a t a p r o s p e c t i v e c a n d i d a t e has s u f f i c i e n t l y c o m p l i e d w i t h t h e l a w s o f t h e S t a t e a n d t h e r u l e s o f a p o l i t i c a l p a r t y t o become a c a n d i d a t e , a n d , upon f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n , t h a t h o l d i n g m i g h t be r e c a l l e d ; and t h i s m i g h t be done b e f o r e t h a t a c t i o n c o u l d be r e v i e w e d i n a c o u r t o f competent j u r i s d i c t i o n and r e v e r s e d i n time f o r t h e c a n d i d a t e t o h a v e h i s name p l a c e d on t h e t i c k e t . I t would a f f o r d s m a l l s a t i s f a c t i o n i f , a f t e r t h e t i c k e t had b e e n p r i n t e d w i t h t h e name o f t h e c a n d i d a t e o m i t t e d , t o have a h o l d i n g b y t h e c o u r t t h a t t h e name s h o u l d n o t have b e e n o m i t t e d . " {Irby v. Barrett {AK, 1942) 163 S.W.2d 512, 514) . Finally, Political P a r t i e s a r e i n no p o s i t i o n t o v e r i f y f o roffice. The primary candidates P a r t i e s have

whether a c a n d i d a t e

i seligible

objective of P o l i t i c a l elected into office. standards f o rtheir

P a r t i e s i s to get t h e i r

While i t i s true that these candidates,

t h e i r purpose i s t o determine i s e l e c t a b l e , not n e c e s s a r i l y f o r any p a r t i c u l a r o f f i c e . I n steps to verify

whether a p a r t i c u l a r c a n d i d a t e whether t h e c a n d i d a t e addition,

i seligible

even i f a P o l i t i c a l

P a r t y has t a k e n for office

whether a candidate

i seligible

i n t h e p a s t , as

private organizations there Political

i s no l e g a l means t o c o m p e l t o do s o i f t h e P a r t i e s d e c i d e t o a l s o be n o t e d t h a t when an while

P a r t i e s t o continue

change t h e i r p o l i c i e s .

I t should

o r g a n i z a t i o n i s i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e o u t c o m e o f an e l e c t i o n a t t h e same t i m e i s s u p p o s e d t o be c h e c k i n g is eligible eligibility for office, there a significant whether a

candidate

r i s k of ignoring

i n favor of e l e c t a b i l i t y ,

and f o r t h a t r e a s o n any

10

determination qualifications

by a P o l i t i c a l

P a r t y as t o t h e t h e i r suspect.

candidates

f o r o f f i c e w o u l d be

Since the O f f i c e of President of t h e United States i s the most p o w e r f u l p o s i t i o n i n the country, t h e r i s k o f " c o r r u p t and

partisan a c t i o n " i s great eligibility

i f the a u t h o r i t y t o determine who a r e l i k e l y t o parties. Given

i s p l a c e d i n t h e hands o f t h o s e t h e i r opposing

g a i n an a d v a n t a g e o v e r this risk, the proper

political

remedy f o r e l i g i b i l i t y

disputes

i s to rather

b r i n g such d i s p u t e s t o t h e Court than

f o ra determination,

t o Congress o r t o t h e E l e c t o r a l C o l l e g e , and t h i s Court has o f f a c t and law r e g a r d i n g of a p o l i t i c a l candidate with

t h e power t o make d e t e r m i n a t i o n s c o n t r o v e r s i e s over little

the e l i g i b i l i t y

likelihood of partisan results. and u n t i l a determination i s made a s t o t h e d u t i e s t o candidates

Unless

of t h e Alabama S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e w i t h r e g a r d s p l a c e d on t h e b a l l o t , there w i l l continue

t o be c o n f u s i o n a n d

u n c e r t a i n t y a s t o who may C o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y r u n f o r t h e O f f i c e o f President. duty For a l l of these reasons, t h e i s s u e o f who h a s t h e the Court may p r o p e r l y

to v e r i f y a candidate's on t h i s

eligibility

make a d e t e r m i n a t i o n request
II. THE

i s s u e , a n d Amicus

respectfully

t h a t t h i s Court
QUESTION OF THE

grant Appellant's
THE

request.
A CANDIDATE COULD FOR

VERIFYING

E L I G I B I L I T Y OF

PRESIDENT OF

UNITED

STATES,

I F LEFT

UNRESOLVED,

LIKELY

11

RESULT IN MORE INELIGIBLE PERSONS SEEKING THE OFFICE, AND RECURRING LITIGATION OVER THE ISSUE
Amicus requests that t h i s Court r e s o l v e t h e current issue candidate as

o f who h a s t h e a u t h o r i t y t o v e r i f y t h a t a P r e s i d e n t i a l meets t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y r e q u i r e d e l i g i b i l i t y there remains a q u e s t i o n unless

requirements,

a s t o w h e t h e r a b s u r d r e s u l t s may o c c u r Arnold Schwarzenegger i s w e l l

t h i s Court so determines.

known a s h a v i n g compelling status,

b e e n b o r n i n A u s t r i a . I f t h e r e a r e no means o f birth

v e r i f i c a t i o n of a P r e s i d e n t i a l candidate's

a n d no c o u r t h a s t h e power t o do s o , Mr. S c h w a r z e n e g g e r of the United States,

c o u l d r u n f o r , a n d be e l e c t e d . P r e s i d e n t

as t h e r e a r e no means o f d e m a n d i n g c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n a l requirements f o r the p o s i t i o n . Further, i f the

L i b e r t a r i a n P a r t y were t o n o m i n a t e t h e l a t e A y n Rand a s t h e i r candidate f o r P r e s i d e n t , c o u l d s h e be r e m o v e d f r o m t h e b a l l o t on of the United

the grounds t h a t she i s n o t a n a t u r a l b o r n c i t i z e n

S t a t e s , and/or t h a t she i s dead? Because o f t h e c u r r e n t u n c e r t a i n t y a s t o w h e t h e r a n y one p o s i t i o n o r g r o u p h a s t h e authority to verify a candidates eligibility foroffice, a as w e l l

s t r o n g p o t e n t i a l o f f u r t h e r abuses and a b s u r d r e s u l t s , as r e c u r r i n g l i t i g a t i o n request on t h e i s s u e . Amicus

respectfully

that t h i s Court grant A p p e l l a n t ' s

request.

12

III. TO V E R I F Y PLACEMENT

T H E ALABAMA

SECRETARY

OF

STATE

HAS

T H E STATUTORY F O R O F F I C E WHO

DUTY SEEK

THE E L I G I B I L I T Y ON THE BALLOT.

FOR A L L CANDIDATES

The

Alabama S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e has t h e d u t y o f t h e c h i e f f o r t h e S t a t e o f Alabama, t o ensure that

elections officer

Alabama and F e d e r a l e l e c t i o n laws a r e f o l l o w e d

(Alabama's

E l e c t i o n Code 17-1-3 ( a ) . "The S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e i s t h e c h i e f elections o f f i c i a l i n t h e s t a t e and s h a l l p r o v i d e The S e c r e t a r y uniform

guidance f o r e l e c t i o n a c t i v i t i e s . granted

of State i s o f Chapter

r u l e making a u t h o r i t y f o r t h e implementation

2 under the Alabama A d m i n i s t r a t i v e P r o c e d u r e A c t . " ) In order to f u l f i l l the duty t o advise candidates, the several

Alabama S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e p r o v i d e s

of h e r website

documents w i t h i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g

t h e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and Documents for a l l

minimum r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r e a c h e l e c t e d p o s i t i o n . listing

t h e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and requirements a r e p r o v i d e d

s t a t e and F e d e r a l o f f i c e s , any eligibility

except f o r i n e x p l i c a b l e absence o f for theoffice of

requirements for running States.

President of theUnited The every

Alabama S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e f o r these

i srequired to verify

that

candidate

positions i se l i g i b l e those candidates

f o r t h e sought t h a t have been S t a t e s by a

position,

w i t h one e x c e p t i o n :

selected for theoffice Political

of President

of theUnited

Party arenot apparently

not required t o present t o

13

t h e A l a b a m a S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e any eligibility f o r the o f f i c e of

documentation proving

their

President. P a r t i e s are not, and are i s to should

As d i s c u s s e d a b o v e . P o l i t i c a l n o t be, complied responsible for ensuring w i t h , as t h e p r i m a r y elect their reason,

t h a t E l e c t i o n s Laws

goal of the v a r i o u s p a r t i e s

p r o m o t e and

candidates. Federal or State that requirements their sought. the duty of

For t h i s compelling

t h e r e a r e no

Political

Parties to provide proof are e l i g i b l e

respective candidates Contrary to the

f o r the o f f i c e s Parties,

i n t e r e s t s of the

Political

the Alabama S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e i s t o v e r i f y are e l i g i b l e f o r the o f f i c e s sought.

that a l l candidates

This duty on t h e b a l l o t , political and,

should p r o p e r l y extend and not

to a l l candidates

listed

exempt a c a n d i d a t e

s i m p l y because a for President, to substitute f o r the duty of the that

party selects a p a r t i c u l a r candidate to f i n d otherwise w o u l d be

f o r the Court

c h o i c e of u n e l e c t e d p o l i t i c a l

party o f f i c i a l s

t h e S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e owes t o t h e c i t i z e n s o f t h e S t a t e Alabama, t o ensure t h a t the S t a t e ' s e l e c t i o n complied with. i f any S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e were c o m p e l l e d n o m i n a t e d by a Political to laws are

fully

Finally, any and

place the is

a l l candidates without

P a r t y on

ballot, eligible

independently

verifying

t h a t the candidate w o u l d be

f o r the o f f i c e ,

such a requirement

in direct

14

c o n f l i c t w i t h the requirements f o r P r e s i d e n t i a l Article I I of the U n i t e d States C o n s t i t u t i o n . Secretary

eligibility

in

In C a l i f o r n i a , very similar

the d u t i e s of the

of State

are

t o the d u t i e s of Alabama S e c r e t a r i e s of

State,

i n c l u d i n g the d e s i g n a t i o n of " C h i e f E l e c t i o n s (California Government Code 12172) and

Officer"

p u b l i s h i n g minimum have

requirements f o r o f f i c e . C a l i f o r n i a h i s t o r i c a l l y exercised their necessary due

S e c r e t a r i e s of S t a t e reviewing

d i l i g e n c e by

background documents, v e r i f y i n g by the

that the

candidates

t h a t were s u b m i t t e d eligible Peace and

respective p o l i t i c a l

p a r t i e s as the Cleaver The

f o r the b a l l o t

were, i n d e e d ,

e l i g i b l e . I n 1958,

Freedom P a r t y s u b m i t t e d candidate

t h e name o f E l d r i d g e of the U n i t e d

as a q u a l i f i e d

for President

States,

t h e n S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e , Mr. t o Mr. old Cleaver's

Frank Jordan,

found t h a t , o n l y 34 shy

according years 35

b i r t h c e r t i f i c a t e , he

w o u l d be one

at the time of the g e n e r a l o f age n e e d e d t o be on

election,

year

of the for

years

the b a l l o t

as a c a n d i d a t e Jordan

President. Using Mr. Cleaver

h i s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p o w e r s , Mr. Mr. Cleaver,

removed

from the b a l l o t .

unsuccessfully, State United Secretary ballot. of

challenged California,

t h i s d e c i s i o n t o t h e Supreme C o u r t o f t h e and, l a t e r , t o t h e Supreme C o u r t o f t h e a c t i o n s of the C a l i f o r n i a of Cleaver's U.S. 810,

States, which a f f i r m e d the o f S t a t e by Cleaver denying review

removal from the 89 S.Ct, 43.

v. Jordan

(1968) 393

Similarly,

15

i n 1984, t h e P e a c e a n d Freedom P a r t y l i s t e d Mr, L a r r y Holmes a s an e l i g i b l e c a n d i d a t e California Secretary i n the Presidential of State, primary. When t h e t h e n

D a n i e l M. B u r n s , c h e c k e d Mr.

Holmes' e l i g i b i l i t y , similarly, ballot. The

i t was f o u n d t h a t Mr. Holmes was,

n o t e l i g i b l e , a n d Mr. Holmes was r e m o v e d f r o m t h e

removal o f i n e l i g i b l e candidates a c t i o n s by C a l i f o r n i a Secretary

i s not a r e l i c of as t h e power past

historical current

Secretaries of State,

California

of State

has e x e r c i s e d t h i s

t o remove i n e l i g i b l e c a n d i d a t e s year, one P e t a Lindsay

from the b a l l o t .

Just t h i s

was s e l e c t e d b y t h e P e a c e a n d Freedom candidate on t h e 2012 C a l i f o r n i a and

P a r t y t o be t h e i r

Presidential

p r i m a r y b a l l o t . BOWEN, h o w e v e r , r e j e c t e d Ms. L i n d s a y , refused old, to place h e r name on t h e b a l l o t ,

b e c a u s e she i s 27 y e a r s that

when t h e U.S. C o n s t i t u t i o n , f o r President a similar

A r t i c l e 2, 1, r e q u i r e s

candidates now e x i s t s

t o be a t l e a s t

35 y e a r s o f a g e . T h e r e California candidates from

situation

t o that i n which

S e c r e t a r i e s o f S t a t e h a v e removed P r e s i d e n t i a l the b a l l o t submitted candidate office. i n the past,

namely t h a t t h e D e m o c r a t i c P a r t y has Party

B a r a c k H u s s e i n Obama, J r . , a s a D e m o c r a t i c f o r President, when he i s a r g u a b l y situation

i n e l i g i b l e f o r the the

Further,

a similar

was a l l e g e d c o n c e r n i n g

Republican Secretary

Party candidacy of M i t t

Romney. S i n c e

the California

o f S t a t e has d e m o n s t r a t e d by h e r a c t i o n s t h a t she can

16

and

does remove i n e l i g i b l e p r e s i d e n t i a l she has t h e a u t h o r i t y by v i r t u e

candidates

from the

ballot,

o f h e r o f f i c e t o make

such v e r i f i c a t i o n of e l i g i b i l i t y presidential or otherwise.

f o r a l l candidates, t h e Alabama Secretary

I n l i k e manner,

o f S t a t e by v i r t u e o f h e r o f f i c e , has t h e a u t h o r i t y t o r e q u i r e that candidates provide proof f o r the o f f i c e of President of the United States

t o v e r i f y t o her that they

are i n fact e l i g i b l e uphold

f o r s a i d o f f i c e , and s h e s h o u l d this duty.

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

As d i s c u s s e d a b o v e , t h e A l a b a m a 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 by A l a b a m a s t a t u t e t o o v e r s e e e n f o r c e Alabama e l e c t i o n s a t i s f i e d by a t t e m p t i n g law t o any o t h e r e n t i t y , Alabama e l e c t i o n s , c a n n o t be to enforce parties, Amicus request. election o r even and t o

law. This requirement to transfer the duty

s u c h as t o p o l i t i c a l For these reasons.

t o t h e Alabama e l e c t o r a t e . respectfully request

that t h i s Court

grant Appellant's

CONCLUSION

As d i s c u s s e d a b o v e , t h e A l a b a m a S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e be r e q u i r e d t o v e r i f y a p r e s i d e n t i a l eligible candidate

should

i s i n fact

f o r s a i d o f f i c e . A r t i c l e 2 o f t h e U.S. C o n s t i t u t i o n f o r a candidate f o r the now

s e t s f o r t h t h e minimum r e q u i r e m e n t s

o f f i c e of President of the Unites S t a t e s , f o r which there

17

a r e no s t a n d a r d s of e l i g i b i l i t y an u n b i a s e d L a c k i n g such

or bodies

a u t h o r i z e d t o make a n y d e t e r m i n a t i o n r e l y i n g on P o l i t i c a l P a r t i e s t o make candidates. persons

other than

determination of e l i g i b i l i t y d i r e c t i o n may r e s u l t

f o rtheir

i n clearly

ineligible

being e l e c t e d i n the future unless t h i s t h i s Court. t h i s Court For these reasons, Tlmicus request.

i s s u e i s r e s o l v e d by that

r e s p e c t f u l l y request

grant Appellant's

^^^^^^^^^^^^^m^tted^,^^^^^^^^^

NATHANIEL OLESON UNITED STATES J U S T I C E FOUNDATION 932 "D" S t r e e t , S u i t e 2 Ramona, C a l i f o r n i a 92065 Tel: (760) 788-6624 Fax: (760) 788-6414 E m a i l : natban@u_s2fmail. n e t Counsel // // // // // // // // // // // f o r Amicus.

18

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby c e r t i f y t h a t I am an employee o f the U n i t e d S t a t e s J u s t i c e Foundation, 932 D S t r e e t , S u i t e 3, Ramona, CA 92065; t h a t I am of such age and d i s c r e t i o n t o be competent t o serve papers; and t h a t on the 14th day of May, 2013, I served c o p i e s of the f o r e g o i n g w i t h the C l e r k o f the Supreme Court and a l l counsel i n t h i s matter by p l a c i n g the f o r e g o i n g i n a s e a l e d envelope w i t h c e r t i f i e d postage thereon f u l l y p r e p a i d , i n the U n i t e d States m a i l a t Ramona, C a l i f o r n i a , addressed as s e t f o r t h below: L. Dean Johnson L. Dean Johnson, P.C. 4030 Balmoral Dr., S u i t e B H u n t s v i l l e , AL 35801 L a r r y Klayman Klayman Law F i r m 2020 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20006 Hon. Luther Strange Margaret L. Fleming James W. Davis Laura E. Howell Attorney General o f Alabama 501 Washington S t r e e t Montgomery, AL 36130 Thomas A. Woodall SIROTE & PERMUTT, P.C. 2311 Highland Avenue South Post O f f i c e Box 55727 Birmingham, AL 35255-5727

S u i t e 800

E. Wilson

19