Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Mr Rogers

Ummm, the ADP submitted copies of the LFBC and the AZ LOV recently. The so-called “birthers” responded to this, and THAT is why the ADP is backing off on what it submitted. It helps to understand details like this.


23 posted on 05/23/2013 8:32:36 AM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: edge919

There is no indication I can see that the Alabama challenge will consider ANY birth certificate. The issues are 1) is the case moot? and 2) does the Sec of State have a legal duty to investigate a candidate’s qualifications?

There is no issue involving a birth certificate for the supreme court to review.

People can put anything they want in a motion, but the court will review the issues before them - and this appeal is NOT about birth certificates. See page 4:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/133193816/McInnish-Goode-v-Chapman-Brief-of-Appellant-Oral-Argument-Requested-Alabama-Supreme-Court-3-26-2013

Also see:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/87140552/McInnish-v-Chapman-Order-Striking-Petition-for-Writ-of-Mandamus-Alabama-Supreme-Court-Obama-Ballot-Challenge-3-27-2012

I do not know how the law is written in Alabama, but in Arizona, the law did NOT support a duty to investigate candidates. I wrote my reps and asked them to change the law, but it did not happen.


26 posted on 05/23/2013 9:08:15 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (Liberals are like locusts...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson