E-Filed 05/14/2013 @ 03:37:08 PM Honorable Robert Esdale Clerk Of The Court

Case

No. 1,720465
COURT OF ALABAMA

IN THE SUPREME
HUGH

MCfNNISH, et df., AppelJ_ants,

v.
BETH

.HAP N' in her capacity as secretary of state,

pel1ee.

ON APPEAL FROM THE CTRCUIT COURT OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, ALAB

cv

Appell-ants' Reply to

TH

L. L.

Dean Johnson

Larry

KLAYMAN

Washington, D.C. 20006

FR

Tel-: (310) 595-0800

Attorneys for Appel_lants

IE

2020 Pennsylvania Ave,

ND

Klayman

, Suite Huntsville, AL 35901 Tel-: (256) 88 0-5]-17

FTRM

4030 Bal_moral Dr.

DEAN JOHNSON, P. C.

OF

Suite

800

NW

EF OG
201,3_1053
B

pellee's Brief

BO

.C OM

TABLE OF CONIENTS

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
SUMMARY
ARGUMENT

.C OM W BO
IL
STATUTE DOES NOT APPLY

TABLE OF CONTENTS

i
l_l_

OF THE

ARGUMENT

.2
2
2

I. rT.

CASE NOT

MOOT

REASONS APPELLANTS CLATM DOES NOT

A. .]URISDICTION STRIPPING

.2

B.
11

EF OG

SECRETARY SHOULD NOT ESCAPE HER

CONGRESS NOT ONLY

DUTY

AUTHORITY. EXCUSE

III.

CHAPM

'S

SILENCE

CONCLUSION

OF

TH

D. PRINTED BALLOTS NOT AN

.5

FR

IE

ND

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

l0

TABLE OF AUTEORTTIES
Cases

Statutes And Other Legislative

thority

peal

FR

IE

ND

U.S. Const. Art fV, 51,

OF

Ala. Code S 1,7-16-44: Alabama Jurisdiction in El_ection Contests;

TH

Ala. Code S 1,7 -9-3: persons entitled to have names printed on ballots; failure to Secretary of State to certify nominations

EF OG
l_L

BO

v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and role, The C onweal-th Court of pennsylvania, No. 598 II, D. 2007, ,,an unr orted. single-judge,Memorandum inion,,,
Coady

.C OM

Chapman's

brief fafls naturally into

two

iq nrnh:l-rla !o vlvvqulE

cause to suspect fraud.

r

r-^1- or.rnrrz Drle aha dvers 1 rz /-nnnr^vquEyvrJ aVe1. S tnaE. that orrr_y 6rn uongress- can act

EF OG
,,-f urrsr, l-^!u!

be unqualified for the office sought, even where there

rn the latter
to bar an
the

ltncltl.a'l i f iarl urr.1uqarr-LE.'-.

.l-f ^ 4-=nrl'i CanO.IC.ate,

^n^ af.*,

'i^ III

'll^*L^l appeJ-lantl

OF

Since these arguments have alreadv been addressed

rrrir^rin-a'l h.iaf lrrer, rnrl ,.r._,,t WiShinq orrLr tO

terse form.

FR

IE

ND

Mcrnnish and Goode wil-l address each in sunmary and

burden the Court with needl_ess redundancies,

TH

barlots are arready printed it is too l-ate for correction even if an error is manifest.

BO
that

responsibirity whatsoever for interdicting the names of potential candidates who mav

arguments discraiming any

W
SinCe

categories: First, she argues that this court l_acks jurisdiction to hear the case and, second, she presents

.C OM

SUMIfARY OF TEE ARGUMENT

ARGI'MENT

is

moot.

requirement of one exception, but meets each of the

t.hree. coady v. pennsylvania Board of probation and

Parole, commonwearth court of pennsylvania No. 59g M. D. 200f; (See Appelfants' Brief (AB), 12) . rr.
chapman next propounds severar other reasons

why the AppeJ-lantst claims should fai1.

under the "jurisdiction

ND

A.

she contends that rhis court facks iurisdiction

OF

FR

IE

r1-76-44. But as we have already explained, this statute is re]evant to the conduct of el_ect.ions, and
i n .nroqi_ i an has alreadv been conducted.

the election

we

are' on the contrary, asking chapman to take the extraordinarily simple step, of demandinq birth

TH

EF OG

is sufficient to render a case nonmoot, and showing, further, that thj_s case meets, not iust the

stripping statue," Afa. code s

BO

their original brief, showing that there are three exceptions to the mootness doctrine, any one of which

But this case is not moot. Mcrnnish and Goode have carefully explained the doctrine of nonmootness in

.C OM

f.

fn her brief

chapman first

argues that this case

certificates

from each of the rlresi dential candidates,

the eligibility candidate.

2r)
.

of each to be a bone fide presidential

(AB,

Hence s ri -16-44 is inappricabl-e .

B. The secretary attempts to escape her duty to

she has no duty to do so.

As explained earl_i_er in the statute tists

those

Apperl-ants' original

brief,

whose names should go on the bal-l-ot, but adds the

caveat "provided they are otherwise qualified

EF OG

BO

r-or.| i frz wr-rry anl v quarJ-rf arrrl.i -i eo vsrLrrv ^,-J candi-dates by decf aring that

W
The

implication is crear: The lawmakers anticipated that office sought and these shoul-d be excruded. (AB, 30. rn the present case there is prentiful at least one of the presidential unqualified.

OF

there would be those who were not qualified

TH

of f ice they seek. "

Al_a

. Code S I1-g-3 .

evidence that
was

ND

candidates

chapman knew this before the el_ection him

IE

and she looked aside from her clutrz and certified

FR

without so much as a superficial

inquiry.

Secretary of State had gaj_ned knowl_edqe from

official

source that there is probable cause to

.C OM
for the for the
)

especial-ly in the case of Barack Obama, to determine

The an

bel-ieve that president obama has not met a certifvinq of Maricopa County Arizona (and indisputably, official
empowered by the l-aw of the state),

concluded, as stated in hls affidavit,

and fraud was likely

'....that forgerv

committed in kev ident.itv

documents including president obama's long-form birth

certif icate, his serective Service

and his Social Security nu er.,,

BO
Reo'i

W
straf -i on
card,,
D)

sheriff Arpaio is undoubtedly an official_ source. rn addition, the Ful-l- Faith and credit cl_ause of the u.s.
"Ful.l- Faith and Credit

every other state. " The fact that sheriff Arpaior ds a public official_, the pubric in investigating

OF

the public Acts, Records, and judicial- proceedings of Arpaio is in sherif f Arizona, and not in Al-abama, is irrer-evant.

TH

Constitution,

Article

IV, Section I, provides that

sha I

ND

EF OG
e'l

(AB, Appendix

I l-rc rri rzorl in each stace ro

was actj_nq on behal_f of

the quarifications

FR

IE

President

Obama and

his

icrihi'l'i f rz t-.o be president of

the united states, and, furl faith and credit shoutd Fortunately for justice it is not too

and must be given to his public acts and subsequenE

findings-

.C OM
an

nrr: I i f j ^-l_.i 16 enna.i .i ^^ qudrr-rr-cdraorr. DIrec-L-r_rcal1y, Joseph M. Arpaio, sheriff

of

r_ate

to correct

thi o a.yrodin,.g error,

and this

Court has

needed to do so.

C. Chapman alleges that only Congress has the authority to judge the qualifications candidates after an election. qualifications

of nre.sidential

rt is true that

of the candidates, but it is not true

that it has the excfusive authority to do so. As

excl-ude from its ball-ot those who are ineliqible

EF OG
)

BO

congress does indeed have the authority to judge the

sovereign state surery Alabama has the authority to for office.

The Cal-ifornia Ser:ref :rrr nf State denied

bal-rot access for presidential

TH

candidates in 19Gg and secretary of state

determined that those candidates did not meet the

constitutional- qualifications

OF

again in 2012. The california

and woul_d not arl_ow

D. Finally,

IE

powerless to correct any error in certificatj_on

ND

those names on the baf l_ots. (AB, 19.

chapman preads, once again, that she was

the ballots had already been printed.

FR

Afthouqh this

addresses an issue that is pass6, there are rwo points

1_n

that are intercsfinrr

note:

First,

aS haS been

.C OM
a

ready at hand the means to set in motion what is

since

dOne

i-n other jurisdictions,

it is simpre to correct, not

sites stating that votes for the bogus candidate woufd not be counted. Second, this chronofogical pi_cture
q.lranrr-l rz -Lcrrrrorces, rai nnrn^d rurvrrvry
11

-i ^ a stark r-n

exa

f e here

roqAn1- r'=ca,, one vf rv of v! the Llrs r Ll_LgJ for rules IL,l

nonmootness, namery the case which is capable of

repetition rrr -

but evadinq review.

chapman's brief

silence.

avoiding a judicial mandate to do her dutv

OF

A. No word is offered in arguing that the birth certificates submitted by obama are genuine. Atl her arguments are aimed at suppressing the truth by

TH

EF OG

speaks most loudly in its

discover it.

FR

unqualified presidential candidates on the ballots. fn 1968 Eldridoe Cl earzer wes refused ball_ot
al-l-ow

IE

access and in 2012, peta Lindsey was l_ikewise refused

ballot access. (AB, 19.) The Secretary of state in

ND

B. chapman's sirence regarding the two carifornia situations where the secret.ari-es of State would not

BO

a irrdrrmenjd, uI J Ljlrgrltgl.t L nf

W
and

.C OM
in this

the printed ballot, but the effect of an erroneousrvprinted ballot, e.g., posting signs at the votins

Al-abama

has the same authority and responsibility that

Conclusion

The questi-on of the legitimacy of obama's birth

rt may be helpful at this point to step back, take a deep breath, and look at the overal-l- scene from a

we see:
We see

a bizarre and vicious fight being

We

OF

at the individual- pixels.

TH

distance, to l-ook at the forest, unobscured by close-up trees and undergrowth, to l-ook at the ful_l_ picture, not
And when we do here

EF OG

certificate has been a controversy that has existed for severa] years. A11 those invol_ved have been examinino the controversy up cl_ose in great detail_.

BO

mil-lions of doll_ars being expended by one side

would resolve the issue. l We see a torrent of

FR

' See : http : hawaii . govlheal_thlvital_-records,/vital_ records/viLar records.html- for a form to obtain a birth certifi-cate from the Hawali Department of Hearth. The form

IE

defending its posi-tion, when a ten-dol-rar

ND

over the small_est trivial_ity.

see literal1y

documenc

.C OM
is
what
waged

the Secretary of St.ate in Cal_ifornia has.

i-nvecti-ve being hurled indiscrimi-natef v af onr^,.nants

the media.
And what is at the core of the issue?

birth certifi-cate.

A birth certificate,

just tike

Yes, it is, or it ought to be, trivial_

BO

teenager needs to obtain a l_earner's permit and iust Iike a man needs to join the armv.
excepr

for the circumstances of the one whose birth certi-ficate is sought, namely that of Barack obama. He happens to be president of the United States, but that

i nf 'l rran^a rnA mnnnt' rr-trruerlceT ^ avoid doing so. dlr..rl\Jrrey .lLU

OF

his true birth certificate,

TH

in itseff does not change the simpricity at base. obama, for reasons unstated, refuses to produce
and has used his power,
when this

cacophony and confusion surrounding this issue. were an

a required fee of $1O.OO. The DoH explains that vital- documents wil-l- be j-ssued only to persons who "have a direct and tangibl-e interest in the record." rn li_strng examples of those whom they consider to have the requisite rnterest, the first listed is "the registrant (the person whom the record is concerned with. ) " rn this case the l-atter is Barack Obama.
shows

FR

IE

ND

nonsensical- picture,

scenario is seen clearly it forms an e arrassingly a caricature of the great

EF OG

.C OM
It is
a a

we see abounding inaccuracies and prevarications

in

economist asked to conduct a benefits-co.st-^n:'1 rrsis,

outweigh the cost and by how much. one can imaqine his astonishment. "Prima facie-" hc min\f Sdy, "the answer

is visibl-e.

The benefits are monumental, and the costs The benefi_ts-cost ratio,

are infinit.esimal .

There 1s nothinq here for

mo1-nrlnIt

This court has both the right and the power to su arily end this untoward controversy. By requiring the secretary of state to certificate from
demand

McInnj-sh and Goode pray the Court to do so.

ND

OF

candidates, the i-ssue, insofar as Al-abama is concerned, can be settl_ed.

TH

Obama and

IE

FR

Email : j ohnson deanGbelfsouth. net

Tel-: (256) Fax: (256 )

Huntsvill_e, AL

L. DEAN .fOHNSON, Y.C. 4030 Bal-moral Dr., Suite

35801

L. Dear{Johnson \

EF OG

a bona fide birth

al_l other presidential_

BO

soars upward toward infinity.

W
(JoH04
6

880-5177
BB0-5187

.C OM
therefore,
)

his charge would be to determine whether the benefits

Larry Klayman, Esq.

KLAYMAN LAW FIRM

Suite 800 Washington, DC 20006 Tel-: (310) 595-0800 Email-: l-ekl-a anGqmail-. com Pro Hac Vice

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

FR

IE

ND

Montgomery, Al_abama 36130

Hon. Luther strange, Attorney Generar of Alabama Andrew L. Brasher, Deputy Solicitor General_ Margaret L. Fleming James W. Davis Laura E. Howel_1 Office of the Attorney General_ of Alabama 501 Washington Street

OF

TH

r HEREBY cERTrFy that on the 14 day of May 2013, T el-ectronically filed the foregoing with the clerk of the supreme court of Al-abama using the ACrs filing system, which will- send notification of such filinq to the following:

EF OG
10

BO

.C OM

2020 Pennsylvania Ave.

NW,