Tuesday, December 30, 2008

Keyes v. Lingle: Wrong Statute!? ..wtf?

NO. 29473

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI‘I

CONSTITUTION PARTY; ALAN L. KEYES, Plaintiffs,

vs.

LINDA LINGLE in her official capacity as Governor of the
State of Hawai‘i; KEVIN B. CRONIN in his official capacity as
the Chief Election Officer for the State of Hawai‘i; JOHN
DOES 1-50; JANE DOES 1-50; DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-50; DOE
CORPORATIONS 1-50; AND DOE ENTITIES 1-50, Defendants.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ORDER OF DISMISSAL
(By: Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Acoba and Duffy, JJ.)

Upon consideration of the Complaint to Contest the 2008 Presidential Election submitted by Plaintiffs Constitution Party and Alan L. Keyes, the Motion to Dismiss submitted by Defendants Governor Linda L. Lingle and Chief Election Officer Kevin B. Cronin, it appears the Plaintiffs style the complaint as an election contest brought pursuant to Hawai‘i Revised Statutes §§ 11-172 and 11-174.5, but allege, in pertinent part, that Defendant Cronin failed to require proof that candidate Barack Obama was qualified to be a candidate for President of the United States. Any challenge to the Chief Election Officer's finding of eligibility of a presidential candidate in the State of Hawai‘i must be pursued in accordance with HRS § 11-113(e), not sections 11-172 and 11-174.5. Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is granted and this case is dismissed.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai‘i, December 5, 2008.

"in accordance with HRS § 11-113(e)"

"(e) If the applicant, or any other party, individual, or group with a candidate on the presidential ballot, objects to the finding of eligibility or disqualification the person may, not later than 4:30 p.m. on the fifth day after the finding, file a request in writing with the chief election officer for a hearing on the question. A hearing shall be called not later than 4:30 p.m. on the tenth day after the receipt of the request and shall be conducted in accord with chapter 91. A decision shall be issued not later than 4:30 p.m. on the fifth day after the conclusion of the hearing. [L 1970, c 26, pt of §2; am L 1973, c 217, §1(ff); am L 1977, c 189, §1(8); am L 1983, c 34, §14; am L 1993, c 304, §6]

HAWAII BALLOT FACTSHEET

EXHIBIT A: affidavit #1!

EXHIBIT C: affidavit #2!!

3 comments:

  1. Hi Philip -

    Yes. How sad is it that all of these lawsuits are being dismissed on "technicalities" and for the reason of certain citizens "not having standing" to put the case forward in the first place?

    Awful!!

    I am still praying diligently for Philip Berg's case to finally get heard on Jan. 9th. Once the Congress counts the usurper elector votes in (provided no one objects which will probably happen because the weasels are too afraid to object to Obama), then Philip J. Berg and ALL CITIZENS of the United States of America should have standing. Why? Because each of us would be harmed if an ineligible POTUS is placed in office.

    Thanks for becoming a follower at my blog. I'm adding yours to my "Obama Crimes" blogroll.

    God bless you,
    Christine

    ReplyDelete
  2. Challenge, can anyone prove this wrong?:–

    1. Constitution Article II requires USA President to be “natural born citizen”.

    2. BHO’s website admits his dad was Kenyan/British, not American, citizen when BHO was born.

    3. BHO is therefore not a “natural born citizen” (irrespective of Hawaiian birth or whether he may be a 14th Amendment “citizen” of USA) — as confirmed in the Senate’s own McCain qualification resolution agreed to by BHO.

    4. Supreme Court has already docketed two upcoming conferences, 1/9/09 and 1/16/09 — between dates Congress counts electoral votes (1/8/09) and Presidential inauguration (1/20/09) — to address Berg Case and fashion relief on BHO’s eligibility to be President.

    5. Since no facts are in dispute, Supreme Court rules on Summary Judgment to enjoin BHO’s inauguration as President.

    6. Therefore, BHO is not inaugurated as President.

    7. Vice President Elect Biden is inaugurated Acting President under the 20th Amendment to serve until new President is determined — the procedure for which determination to be set out by Congress and/or the Supreme Court so long as in conformance with the Constitution.

    ReplyDelete
  3. MESSAGE TO EVERY MEMBER OF CONGRESS:

    When counting the electoral votes, either Congress finds by 1/8/09 that Obama, not being an Article II “natural born citizen”, fails to qualify as President whereupon Biden becomes the full fledged President under 3 USC 19 (free to pick his own VP such as Hillary) or thereafter defers to the Supreme Court to enjoin Obama’s inauguration with Biden becoming only Acting President under the 20th Amendment until a new President is duly determined.

    The preferable choice, at least for the Democrats, should seem obvious.

    ReplyDelete