ORYR: David Farrar v. Barack Obama: First Georgia Ballot Access Challenge Filing Released

The issues for determination by the Court are as follows:

A. Is the candidate's proffered birth certificates, authentic state-issued documents that verify his actual, physical birth in Hawaii?
B. Is the candidate an Article II natural born citizen of the United States as established in US.Supreme Court case: Minor vs Happersett 1875 Page 88 U. S. 163
C. O.C.G.A. § 21-2-560 Making of False Statements Generally. Is the candidate's SocialSecurity number, authentic

A. Barack Obama Sr.'s date of birth was June 18, 1934
B. Barack Obama Sr. was the father of Barack Obama Jr.
C. Barack Obama Sr. was not a U.S. citizen
D. Barack Obama's letter to the DNC stating he meets all Constitutional requirements to takethe Oath of Office of the President of the United States

P-1. Office of Inspector General, Department of Health and Human Services, Birth Certificate Fraud Conclusions:

P-2.Barack-Hussein-Obama-Sr-Immigration-File
P-3The Honolulu Advertiser First Mention: “In November 2008, The Advertiser reported
that the first published mention of the future president appeared in a Sunday Advertiser birthannouncement that ran on Aug. 13, 1961: "Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama, 6085 KalanianaoleHwy., son, Aug. 4." The identical announcement ran the following day in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin. Such vital statistics, however, were not sent to the newspapers by the general public butby the Health Department, which received the information directly from hospitals, Okubo said.Birth announcements from the public ran elsewhere in both papers and usually includedinformation such as the newborn's name, weight and time of birth

Normally, the person challenging an election has the burden of proof as to the allegations contained in the complaint.  Hendry v. Smith, 270 Ga. 17, 505 S.E.2d 216 (1998);  Walls v. Garrett, 247 Ga. 640(1), 277 S.E.2d 903 (1981).

Uhhh, can someone tell me how Haynes v Wells, a case about a state election, applies to a Federal position? What are they gonna say, Obama hasn't been a Georgia resident for 2 years?

I have a hard time imagining Orly wrote that herself, except for the fact that there are a couple things about it that I found very confusing.

—– Original Message —–

From: Ard, Mark
To: jjmertz48@comcast.net
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 9:14 AM
Subject: FW: Status of barack Obama on Florida Ballot ?????????
Dear Mr. Mertz –
Your e-mail to Secretary of State Kurt S. Browning, has been forwarded to the Division of Elections for response.
There are no statutory provisions or rules in Florida regarding challenging candidates’ names on ballots before an election occurs. Because no established procedures exist, the only recourse one has before the election is to institute a legal action to have the candidate removed from the ballot. Typically, such legal actions are brought in the circuit court as a declaratory judgment action seeking the court to declare the candidate ineligible to run for the office. After an election, section 102.168, Florida Statutes, provides that any unsuccessful candidate for the office being sought, any voter qualified to vote in the election, or any taxpayer may file an election contest in the circuit court based upon the successful candidate’s ineligibility of the office sought. Such contest must be brought within 10 days of the date the last board responsible for certifying the results officially certified the results of the election being contested.
For your information: Section 99.061(7)(c), Florida Statutes, provides that the qualifying officer who placed the candidate’s name on the ballot performs a purely ministerial function; that is, the qualifying officer is precluded from looking beyond the four corners of the qualifying documents to determine if the candidate is eligible to run for the office being sought.
I hope this answers your questions.
Mark Ard
Executive Assistant I
Florida Division of Elections
Phone: 850.245.6268
Fax: 850.245.6217
Mark.Ard@dos.state.fl.us

A couple of years ago, a US House candidate (Keith Gross) was challenged and removed from the ballot. The administrative law judge cited Haynes v. Wells in his decision, saying that the federal US House candidate had the burden of establishing his eligibility.

And that judge? Michael Malihi. The same judge as in this case.

I saw that it was the same judge, but here's what I don't understand: Georgia can set the residency requirements for it's Reps. They can't do that for the President.

So.... WTF?

precluded from looking beyond the four corners of the qualifying documents

Anyone have access to Westlaw to Shepardize this?

I have Lexis, and there are several citing decisions, but no negative treatment.

I also found that the standard of proof put is just a preponderance of the evidence. Frankly, it's considerably EASIER for Obama to establish his eligibility than for a state candidate to do so. All Obama has to do is show he was born in the US. Preponderance met. Residency challenges are often much more complicated, involving proof of domicile, voter registration, workplace, driver's licenses, etc.

Since Florida is a KEY state — with many electoral votes and a relatively large population

Haynes v. Wells may be an outlier. The dissenting opinion notes that:



Anyone have access to Westlaw to Shepardize this?

I have Lexis, and there are several citing decisions, but no negative treatment.

I also found that the standard of proof put is just a preponderance of the evidence. Frankly, it's considerably EASIER for Obama to establish his eligibility than for a state candidate to do so. All Obama has to do is show he was born in the US. Preponderance met. Residency challenges are often much more complicated, involving proof of domicile, voter registration, workplace, driver's licenses, etc.

(e) Except as provided in subsection (i) of this Code section, each candidate required to file a notice of candidacy by this Code section shall, no earlier than 9:00 A.M. on the fourth Monday in June immediately prior to the election and no later than 12:00 Noon on the second Tuesday in July immediately prior to the election, file with the same official with whom he or she filed his or her notice of candidacy a nomination petition in the form prescribed in Code Section 21-2-170, except that such petition shall not be required if such candidate is:

(1) A nominee of a political party for the office of presidential elector when such party has held a national convention and therein nominated candidates for President and Vice President of the United States;

(2) Seeking office in a special election;

(3) An incumbent qualifying as a candidate to succeed such incumbent if, prior to the election in which such incumbent was originally elected to the office for which such incumbent seeks reelection, such incumbent filed a notice of candidacy and a nomination petition as required by this chapter;

(4) A candidate seeking election in a nonpartisan election; or

(5) A nominee for a state-wide office by a duly constituted political body convention, provided that the political body making the nomination has qualified to nominate candidates for state-wide public office under the provisions of Code Section 21-2-180.

Qualification of candidates for party nomination in a state or county primary; posting of list of all qualified candidates; filing of affidavit with political party by each qualifying candidate; performance of military service does not create vacancy

This is going to be tougher than they thought...

The Georgia SOS has taken my challenge along with that of three other Georgians and is assigning A Judge to each of them. This is unfolding at a rapid pace and is happening in other parts of the country as well. Stay tuned as this promisses to be a wild ride!

Had the door not opened for the possibility of different result, I wouldn't have bothered but the fact is merits have never been adjudicated. the 0 for 49 (or whatever the number is) results of the past can be thrown out the window and each defense posture will be dealt with. Will they lump them together? No one has a definitive answer on that so speculate all you wish but never discount the underdog. We are a determined bunch of scrappers with simple, reasonable requests and I do hope the Jabonski Atty starts with and hangs his hat on the BC referenced above. As a matter of fact, I'm praying he will do just that.

Haynes v. Wells references OCGA § 21-2-132(e) and OCGA § 21-2-153(e) as the foundation but I do not see it applying to the office f the President

OCGA § 21-2-132(e)