2011-12-09 welden - welden proposed pre-trial order

8/3/2019 2011-12-09 WELDEN - Welden Proposed Pre-Trial Order

1/20

OFFICE OF STATE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

STATE OF GEORGIA

DAVID P. WELDENPlaintiff

v.BARACK OBAMA

Defendant

vin

Docket Number: OSAH-SECSTATE-CE-1215137-60-MALIHI

PRE-TRIAL ORDERCOMES NOW the Plaintiff, David P. Weide'', and files the following Pre-trial Order:

(1) The name, address, Phone number, fax number and Email address of the attorney(s) (orPro se party) who will conduct the hearing is as follows:

Attorney: TBDPro se party: David P. Welden

5530 Wright RoadPowder Springs, GA 30127Phone:770) 943-2025Fax:770) 943-3047Ema il: dpwelden(&gm ail.com(2) The estimated time for the hearing:Direct Examination: One hourCross Examination: TBDTotal: Est.ne to two hours

(3) The following motion is anticipated for consideration by the Court:(a) None anticipated.

1


2/20

(4) The issues for determination by the Court are as follows:A .

Should the name BARACK OBAMA be excluded from the March 6, 2012Democratic Presidential Primary ballot in the State of Georgia? I

1 Hereinafter this Order will respectfully refer to Barack Obama, also known as Barack Hussein Obama Jr., Barack Obama 11, Mr. Obama andPresident Obama as "Barack Obama".

(5) The following is an in-depth outline of the case and contentions including specificstatutes or rules or other source of law upon which each issue is based and any specialauthorities relied upon (please attach a copy of any case, statute, rule and/or regulationcited.

A . Legislation sponsored by Georgia Representative Mark Hatfield (Waycross, WareCounty) acknowledged a need for presidential and vice-presidential candidates toshow they are in compliance with the Article II, Section 1 requirements of theConstitution of the United States of America. HB 401, the Presidential EligibilityAssurance Act was, at one time, co-sponsored by more than ninety (90) GeorgiaRepresentatives. Unfortunately, political pressure prevented the bill from reachingthe House floor for a vote. Representative Hatfield is expected to testify to the needfor enforcement of clearly defined candidate qualification requirements.Ref. Exhibit P-1.

B.On November 1, 2011, acting on behalf of Barack Obama, the Democratic Party ofGeorgia advised the Georgia Secretary of State that the name of one candidate,Barack Obama, will appear on the Democratic Presidential Primary Ballot.Ref. Exhibit P-2.

C.O.C.G.A. 21-2-5 allows Electors to challenge the qualifications of candidates to seekand hold the public office for which he or she is offering. Upon request of theSecretary of State, an Administrative Law Judge may hear the matter and reporthis or her findings to the Secretary of State. If the Secretary of State determines thecandidate is not qualified, the Secretary of State shall withhold the name of thecandidate from the ballot.Ref. Exhibit P-3.

2


3/20

D.

Plaintiff's November 11, 2011 letter to the Georgia Secretary of State challengedthe appearance of Barack Obama on the March 6, 2012 Democratic PresidentialPrimary Ballot.Ref. Exhibit P-4.

E.Barack Obama's Birth Certificate, downloaded by Plaintiff from the White Housewebsite, shows Barack Obama Sr. of Kenya to be the father of Barack Obama.Ref. Exhibit P-5.

F.The Constitution of the United States mandates "No person except a natural borncitizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of thisConstitution, shall be eligible to the office of President." Article II, Section 1.

G.Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875): The United States Supreme Court defined"natural-born citizens" as "all children born in a country of parents who were itscitizens." The same opinion distinguished all other citizens from natural borncitizens.Ref. Exhibit P-6.

H.Because Barack Obama's father was not a citizen of the United States at the time ofBarack Obama's birth, Barack Obama is not a "natural born citizen" as is requiredby the Constitution and defined by the Supreme Court. Therefore, he is notqualified to be placed on the March 6, 2012 Democratic Presidential Primary ballotin the State of Georgia.

(6 ) The types of relief sought are stated as follows:A .

The Court shall report to the Secretary of State, findings that the name BARACKOBAMA should be excluded from the March 6, 2012 Democratic PresidentialPrimary ballot in the State of Georgia.

3


4/20

(7 ) The following facts are stipulated (if any):

A . The Constitution of the United States of America is the supreme law of our land.

B.The Constitution of the United States mandates "No person except a natural borncitizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of thisConstitution, shall be eligible to the office of President." Art. II sec. 1.

C.Barack Obama, Sr., father of Barack Obama, Defendant, was a citizen of Kenya in1961 when Barack Obama was born.

D.The United States Supreme Court has defined "natural born citizens" as "allchildren born in a country of parents who were its citizens." See Minor v.Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875). The same opinion distinguished all other citizensfrom natural born citizens.

(8 ) The following is a list of all exhibits that will be tendered at the hearing. Unless noted,the parties have stipulated as to the authenticity of the exhibits listed and the exhibitslisted may be admitted without further proof of authenticity. All exhibits shall be markedby counsel prior to hearing. Parties shall consolidate exhibits by eliminating duplicatesand use a common numbering system for joint exhibits so that one set of joint exhibits ispresented to the Judge. Exhibits shall be pre-marked by the parties sequentially startingwith "P-." for the Plaintiff's exhibits, and "D-." for the Defendant's exhibits. A copyof the exhibits shall be given to the opposing party no less than 5 days before the hearingand to the Judge when first identified at the hearing.Exhibit P-1: HB 401, the Presidential Eligibility Assurance Act.Exhibit P-2: Letter of November 1, 2011, from Democratic Party of Georgia.Exhibit P-3: O.C.G.A. 21-2-5.Exhibit P-4: Welden letter of November 11, 2011, to Secretary of State.Exhibit P-5: Birth Certificate of Barack Obama, downloaded from the White House

website by Plaintiff, is a Statement of Party Opponent.Exhibit P-6: Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874).

4


5/20

(9) The testimony of the following persons may be introduced by depositions:

(a) NONE

(10) The following are lists of witnesses and a brief description of each witness'expected testimony and relation to the issues for determination.(a) Congressman Mark Hatfield is expected to testify to the need for enforcement of

clearly defined candidate qualification requirements.Opposing counsel may rely on representation by the designated party that she/he willhave a witness present unless notice to the contrary is given in sufficient time prior to thehearing to allow the opposing party to subpoena the witness to obtain her/his testimonyby other means.

(11) The hearing can be avoided if the parties are able to settle the dispute voluntarily.Mediation is available as a possible means of resolving your differences without thenecessity of a formal hearing. The possibilities of settling the case without a hearing are:(a) Unlikely.

This is the 9 t h day of December, 2011.

Submitted by: David P. Welden, Plaintiff

Attorney for Plaintiff: TBD

Attorney for Defendant:

5


6/20

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDER ED THAT the foregoing, including the attachments thereto,constitutes the PRE-TRIAL ORDER in the above case upon filing with the clerk and supersedesthe pleadings that may not be further amended exc ept by order of the Court to prevent manifestinjustice.

SO ORDERED, this day of2012.MICHAEL M. MALIHI, Judge

6


7/20

1 1C 14 0447House Bill 401By: Representatives Hatfield of the 177 th , Jerguson of the 22", Harden of the 28 t h , Allisonof theavis of the 109 th , and others

A BILL TO BE ENTITLEDAN ACT

1 To amend Article 1 of Chapter 2 of Title 21 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated,2 relating to elections, so as to enact the ''Presidential Eligibility Assurance Act"; to state3 legislative intent; to define terms; to provide that no person shall be eligible for placement4 on any ballot as a candidate for President or Vice President unless the Secretary of State shall5 have received and approved adequate evidence of such person's eligibility for election to6 such office; to provide what constitutes adequate evidence of eligibility and provide for the7 time and manner of presentation of such evidence; to provide for review by the Secretary of8 State; to authorize any elector of this state to challenge the qualifications of a candidate; to9 provide for the adoption of rules and regulations; to provide that it shall be a criminal offense

10 for any presidential elector from this state to cast his or her electoral college vote for a11 candidate who is not approved by the Secretary of State as having submitted adequate12 evidence of eligibility; to provide for related matters; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other13 purposes.

14E IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF GEORGIA:15ECTION 1.16 Article I of Chapter 2 of Title 21 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to17 elections, is amended by adding a new Code section to read as follows:1821-2-5. I .19a) This Code section shall be known and may be cited as the 'Presidential Eligibility2 0ssurance Act.'21b) It is the intent of this Code section to ensure that in all elections and primaries held in22his state no person shall be eligible for placement on any ballot as a candidate for23resident or Vice President unless the Secretary of State shall have received and approved24dequate evidence of such person's eligibility for election to such office: and such intent25nd the provisions ofthis Code section shall prevail over any conflicting provisions of any26ther law or regulation of this state. H. B. 401- I -

Exhibit P-1Docket # 1215137


8/20

LC 14 0447

27c) As used in this Code section, the term:2 81) 'Eligibility requirements' means the natural born citizenship. age, and residency29equirements prescribed by Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution for30ligibility for the office of President or Vice President of the United States.3 12) 'Evidence of eligibility' means an affidavit by a candidate stating that the candidate3 2eets each of the eligibility requirements accompanied by and including:3 3A) A certified exact copy of the candidate's first original long-form birth certificate3 4hat includes the candidate's date. time and place of b irth the name of the specific35ospital or other location at which the candidate was born - the attending physician at3 6he candidate's birth the names of the candidate's birth parents and their respective37irthplaces and places of residence - and signatures of the witness or witnesses in3 8ttendance at the candidate's birth. If the foregoing described certified exact copy of the3 9andidate's first original long-form birth certificate is not attached and the candidate's40ffidavit indicates that a first original long-form birth certificate for the candidate does41ot exist, the candidate shall attach certified exact copies of other original42ocumentation including, but not limited to the candidate's birth records, adoption43ecords baptism records. Social Security records, medical records, school and college44ecords, military records. and passport records showing, either individually or45ollectively, that the candidate meets the natural born citizenship, age, and residency46equirements prescribed by Article II Section 1 of the United States Constitution. The47andidate shall not attach certified or other copies of nonorigi nal documents or records,48B) Recitations in the affidavit attesting that the candidate has never been a citizen of49ny country or nation other than the United States o f America; that the candidate has5 0ever held dual or multiple citizenship; and that the candidate has never owed51llegiance to any country or nation other than the United States of America; and52C) Recitations in the affidavit that specifically identify the candidate's places of53esidence in the United States for at least the preceding 14 years.54d) When a state executive committee of a party notifies the Secretary of State of the55ames of the candidates of the party to appear on the pres idential preference primary ballot56s provided for in Code Section 21-2-193, such notification shall be accompanied by57vidence of eligibility of the candidates.5 8e) When a nomination petition of presidential electors for a candidate for President or5 9ice President is submitted to the Secretary of State as provided for in Code Sections601-2-170 and 21-2-171, the nomination petition shall be accompanied by evidence of61ligibility of the candidate.62f) If any person becomes a candidate for election as President or V ice President at the63eneral election without having previously submitted adequate evidence of eligibility underH. B. 401- 2 -


9/20

1 1 C 14 044764ubsection (d) or (e) of this Code section, the Secretary of State shall require the production65f adequate evidence of eligibility before placing such person's name on any ballot.66g) The Secretary of State shall review the evidence of eligibility submitted under67ubsection (d), (e), or (f) of this Code Section. The Secretary of State shall approve the68vidence of eligibility as adequate or if the Secretary of State finds reasonable cause to69elieve that any candidate does not meet the natural born citizenship. age. and residency7 0equirements prescribed by Article II Section 1 of the United States Constitution. the71ecretary of State shall not place such candidate's name on the ballot in this state.72h) Evidence of eligibility submitted to the Secretary of State under this Code section shall7 3e a public document and shall be made available for public inspection and copying within7 4ne business day after it is filed with the Secretary of State.75i) Within two weeks after any evidence of eligibility is filed with the Secretary of State,76ny elector of this state may challenge the eligibility of the candidate submitting the7 7vidence of eligibility in the manner prescribed by Code Section 21-2-5.7 8j) The State Election Board may promulgate rules and regulations for the implementation79f this Code section in a manner consistent with the statement of intent in subsection ( b)8 0f this Code section.81k) It is unlawful for any presidential elector from this state to cast his or her electoral8 2ollege vote for a candidate who is not approved by the Secretary of State as having8 3ubmitted adequate evidence of eligibility. Any person who violates this Code section8 4hall upon conviction be guilty of a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature."8 5ECTION 2.86 All laws and parts of laws in conflict with this Act are repealed.


10/20

November 1, 2011

OSAH`VORM 1Attaaiment No 3

G EORG IA DEMOCRATSWINNING THE FUTURE

The Honorable Brian P. KempSecretary of State214 State CapitolAtlanta, CA 30334Dear Secretary of State Kemp:

Pursuant to OCGA 21-1-193, the Executive Committee of the Democratic Party of Georgia authorized thetransmittal of this letter to your office by Page K. Gleason, the Executive Director of the DemocraticParty of Georgia, at their meeting on October 20, 2011.This letter is to inform you of the candidates whose names should appear on the March 6 DemocraticPresidential Preference Primary Ballot. The Democratic Party does not require petitions, signatures, orfees from candidates seeking presidential nomination. Candidates seeking to be listed on theDemocratic Presidential Preference Primary Ballot should notify the Executive Committee in writing byOctober 31, 2011. One candidate has submitted such a letter, and his name will appear on theDemocratic Presidential Primary Ballot:Barack ObamaIf you have any questions, please contact Executive Director Page Gleason at 678-278-2012 ext. 302 oroagePgeorgiaciemocrat.org .Thank you,

Mike > erlonChairDemocratic Party of Georgiaon behalf of the Executive Committee of the Democratic party of Georgia

PAID FOR BY THE DEMO CRATIC PARTY OF GEORGIA POST OFFICE BOX 20442 ATLANTA, GA 30325MIKE SERLON, CHAIR; NOCEMA WILLIAMS, FIRST VICECHAIR; RUSSELL EDWARDS, TREASURER; RJ HADLEY,

VICE CHAIR; MIGUEL CAMACHO, VICE CHAIR; REP. PEDRO "PETE" MARIN, VICE CHAIR; LAVERNE GASIDNS, SECRETARYNOT AUTHORIZED BY ANY CANDIDATE OR CANDIDATE'S COMMITTEE WWW.GEORGIADEMS.ORG 678-2 Exhibit P-2

Docket # 1215137


11/20

http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/gacocie/

*** Current Through the 2011 Regular Session **"*** Annotations Current Through April 22 ; 2011 ***

TITLE 21. ELECTIONSCHAPTER 2. ELECTIONS AND PRIMARIES GENERALLY

ARTICLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONSO,C.G.A. 21-2-5 (2011)

21-2-5. Qualifications of candidates for federal and state office; determination ofqualifications

(a) Every candidate for federal and state office who is certified by the state executivecommittee of a political party or who files a notice of candidacy shall meet the constitutionaland statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.(b) The Secretary of State upon his or her own motion may challenge the qualifications ofany candidate at any time prior to the election of such candidate. Within two weeks afterthe deadline for qualifying, any elector who is eligible to vote for a candidate may challengethe qualifications of the candidate by filing a written complaint with the Secretary of Stategiving the reasons why the elector believes the candidate is not qualified to seek and holdthe public office for which he or she is offering. Upon his or her own motion or upon achallenge being filed, the Secretary of State shall notify the candidate in writing that his orher qualifications are being challenged and the reasons therefor and shall advise thecandidate that he or she is requesting a hearing on the matter before an administrative lawjudge of the Office of State Administrative Hearings pursuant to Article 2 of Chapter 13 ofTitle 50 and shall inform the candidate of the date, time, and place of the hearing whensuch information becomes available. The administrative law judge shall report his or herfindings to the Secretary of State.(c ) The Secretary of State shall determine if the candidate is qualified to seek and hold thepublic office for which such candidate is offering. If the Secretary of State determines thatthe candidate is not qualified, the Secretary of State shall withhold the name of thecandidate from the ballot or strike such candidate's name from the ballot if the ballots havebeen printed. If there is insufficient time to strike the candidate's name or reprint theballots, a prominent notice shall be placed at each affected polling place advising voters ofthe disqualification of the candidate and all votes cast for such candidate shall be void andshall not be counted.(d ) In the event that a candidate pays his or her qualifying fee with a check that issubsequently returned for insufficient funds, the Secretary of State shall automatically findthat such candidate has not met the qualifications for holding the office being sought, unlessthe bank, credit union, or other financial institution returning the check certifies in writingby an officer's or director's oath that the bank, credit union, or financial institution erred inreturning the check.(e ) The elector filing the challenge or the candidate challenged shall have the right to appealthe decision of the Secretary of State by filing a petition in the Superior Court of FultonCounty within ten days after the entry of the final decision by the Secretary of State. The



12/20

filing of the petition shall not itself stay the decision of the Secretary of State; however, thereviewing court may order a stay upon appropriate terms for good cause shown. As soon aspossible after service of the petition, the Secretary of State shall transmit the original or acertified copy of the entire record of the proceedings under review to the reviewing court.The review shall be conducted by the court without a jury and shall be confined to therecord. The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the Secretary of State as tothe weight of the evidence on questions of fact. The court may affirm the decision orremand the case for further proceedings. The court may reverse or modify the decision ifsubstantial rights of the appellant have been prejudiced because the findings, inferences,conclusions, or decisions of the Secretary of State are:

(1) In violation of the Constitution or laws of this state;(2 ) In excess of the statutory authority of the Secretary of State;(3 ) Made upon unlawful procedures;(4 ) Affected by other error of law;(5 ) Clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the

whole record; or(6 ) Arbitrary or capricious or characterized by an abuse of discretion or a clearly

unwarranted exercise of discretion.An aggrieved party may obtain a review of any final judgment of the superior court by theCourt of Appeals or the Supreme Court, as provided by law.


13/20

David P Welden0 1 1 N O V 1 5 P M 3 : 1 0November 11, 2011

6FFICE 5530 \N-rs -tcrk,-R-atiPowder Springs; GA '301:27770.943.2025cl_pw61dgocirriaitcorn

The Honorable Brian P. KempSecretary of State214 State CapitolAtlanta, Georgia 30334

Re: Complaint, challenging the appearance of the name Barack Obama on the March 6Democratic Presidential Preference Primary Ballot

Dear Secretary of State Kemp,I am a registered voter and elector at the above address in Cobb County, GA.Pursuant to 0.C.G.A. 21-2-5, I hereby challenge the Constitutional eligibility of BarackObama to appear on the March 6 Democratic Presidential Preference Primary Ballotand/or on the November 6, 2012 general election ballot for President of The UnitedStates.This challenge is proper and ripe under 0.C.G.A. 21-2-5, as Barack Obama is acandidate for federal office who has been certified by the Executive Committee of theDemocratic Party of Georgia in their letter of November 1, 2011, and as the deadline fornotifying the Secretary of State of candidacy for the Presidential Primary is October 31,2011, as set in O.C.G.A. 21-2-193.On information and belief, and in support of this challenge to Mr. Obama's eligibility, Irespectfully show as follows:

(1 ) The official state certified birth certificate proffered by Barack Obamacontains a factual inconsistency and other anomalies that calls intoquestion the veracity of the rest of the information contained within saiddocument.

(2 ) Barack Obama has not adequately proven that he was born a natural borncitizen of the United States.



14/20

(3) Barack Obama's alleged father, Barack Obama, Sr., was never a citizen ofthe United States and, at the time of his son's birth, was not a permanentresident of the United States. Consequently, Barack Obama was born toonly one parent who was a U.S. citizen or U.S. permanent resident.

(4) By his own admission, and under the British Nationality Act of 1948,Barack Obama was born a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies,and from 1963 until at least 1984 was also a citizen of the Republic ofKenya.

(5) Due to his dual citizenship with the United Kingdom and with Kenya,Barack Obama was born with dual allegiances to foreign nations otherthan the United States of America.

(6 ) Such additional evidence as may be shown at the hearing of this case.

It therefore appears that Barack Obama does not meet the Constitutional requirementsfor seeking and holding the office of President of the United States because:(a )r. Obama is not a natural born citizen, as required by Article II Section 1of the United States Constitution.Accordingly, I hereby challenge Mr. Obama's qualifications to seek and hold theoffice of President of the United States on these grounds. I respectfully request that younotify Mr. Obama of this challenge and that you request a hearing before a judge of theOffice of State Administrative Hearings.

Respectfully,

David P. Welden

1 . Original: Overnight delivery, November 14, 20112. 1st copy emailed, (jmonk), Nov. 11, 20113 . 2nd copy faxed, (404) 656-0513, Nov. 14, 2011

cc :am Olens, Attorney General, via email


15/20

--------

IP . 1 1 1 1 71ATE OF HAWAII CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTHEPARTMENT OF HEALTHFILE1511. 10611NUMBERlid'. First Name (Type or print)BARACK

lb, Middle Name

HUSSEINle. Loot Name

GHANA, II8.ea

MaleI .ee of Binht 3.his BirthSn .lea Twn C IIctpCity, Town or Rural Location

Honolulu

4.f Twn or Triplet,a,onthayearSb.ourWm Child Bornirthira s]1141:3rdO D*teugust,9617 : 2 4 P . m ,6b.nland

Oahuor Institution (If not in hospital or institution, give Hetet addrem)6d.s Place ofreKapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital"keIesoBirth Inside City or Town Limt*?iedictal district07e.ounty and state or Foreign CountryHonolulu, HawaiiDonal Residence of Mother: City, Town or Rural LocationHonolulu 7b.slandOahu.11 ,--reet Address7f.otherlitailing8 ,ull Name of FatherBARACK

6085alenianaole HighwayAddress

7e.s ResidenceIf subliveTesti NoOBAMA

InsideJudicialD7g.s9.aceCity or Town Limits?districtResidence on Ferro or Plantation!Yes0o 1of FatherAfricanUSSEIN

1 0.ge of Father25 11.irthplace (bland Ian..ornaa CT.aarY- ( e n y a , E a s t A f r i c a: , 12 s,n.*I 0..PIka: Student 1 21 . .ind of Bantam. or IndustryUniversityf,ull Maiden Name

STANLEYof Mother

ANNUNHAM16.irthplace odmd, so.. or Fort;in Coamr0111a.ype of Occupation Outside Home

1iichita, Aansasone! rectify that the sheer s a ted 14.ssor of MotherDuring PregnancyCaucasian17b.ate Last WorkedI s .ge of Mothet71 8information is true and eorreetto the best of my knowledge, 18....are .arer Other Informant,..,2hp"lguillS.IFlZ..--"/.4.4.111./Iwor"..ne1 7 034.44 . , - , Oth 18b.ate of Signaturei hereby certify thatwm bons alive on thehour mated a b o v e . this thilddate andLocal Reg. 19a.ignature tendant,T1T'ppe (.4VJZ..,21.ignature of Lo cal RegistrarOPL P simOther22.:yn:optedkii,-319b.ate of Signatureby Reg. General20 .ote Aeeepted by23.vidence for Delayed Filing or AlterationP R 2 5 2011



16/20

MINOR V. HAPPERSETT, 88 U. S. 162 (1874)Case PreviewFull'feat o f

U.S. Supreme CourtMinor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 21 Wall. 162 162 (1874)Minor v. Happersett88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162ERROR TO THE SUPREMECOURT OF MISSOURISyllabusI. The word "citizen " is often used to convey the idea of membership in a nation.2. In that sense, women, if born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, have always beenconsidered citizens of the United states, as much so before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment to theConstitution as since.3. The right of suffrage was not necessarily one of the privileges or immunities of citizenship before theadoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, and that amendment does not add to these privileges and immunities. Itsimply furnishes additional guaranty for the protection of such as the citizen already had.4. At the time of the adoption of that amendment, suffrage was not coextensive with the citizenship of thestates; nor was it at the time of the adoption of the Constitution.Page 88 U. S. 1635. Neither the Constitution nor the Fourteenth Amendment made all citizens voters.6. A provision in a state constitution which confines the right of voting to "male citizens of the United States" isno violation of the federal Constitution. In such, a state women have no right to vote.The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, in its first section, thus ordains: IFootnl"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of theUnited States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridgethe privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. Nor shall any state deprive any person of life,liberty, or property without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equalprotection of the laws."And the Constitution of the State of Missouri [Footnote 21 thus ordains: Exhibit P-6

Docket # 1215137


17/20

"Every male citizen of the United States shall be entitled to vote."Under a statute of the state, all persons wishing to vote at any election, must previously have been registered inthe manner pointed out by the statute, this being a condition precedent to the exercise of the elective franchise.In this state of things, on the 15th of October, 1872 (one of the days fixed by law for the registration of voters),Mrs. Virginia Minor, a native-born free white citizen of the United States and of the State of Missouri over theage of twenty-one years wishing to vote for electors for President and Vice-President of the United States andfor a representative in Congress and for other officers at the general election held in November, 1872, applied toone Elappersett, the registrar of voters, to register her as a lawful voter, which he refused to do, assigning forcause that she was notPage 88 U. S. 164a "male citizen of the United States," but a woman. She thereupon sued him in one of the inferior state courts ofMissouri for willfully refusing to place her name upon the list of registered voters, by which refusal she wasdeprived of her right to vote.The registrar demurred, and the court in which the suit was brought sustained the demurrer and gave judgmentin his favor, a judgment which the supreme court affirmed. Mrs. Minor now brought the case here on error.Page 88 U. S. 165THE CHIEF JUSTICE delivered the opinion of the Court.The question is presented in this case whether, since the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, a woman whois a citizen of the United States and of the State of Missouri is a voter in that state notwithstanding the provisionof the constitution and laws of the state which confine the right of suffrage to men alone. We might, perhaps,decide the case upon other grounds, but this question is fairly made. From the opinion, we find that it was theonly one decided in the court below, and it is the only one which has been argued here. The case wasundoubtedly brought to this Court for the sole purpose of having that question decided by us, and in view of theevident propriety there is of having it settled, so far as it can be by such a decision, we have concluded to waiveall other considerations and proceed at once to its determination.It is contended that the provisions of the constitution and laws of the State of Missouri which confine the rightof suffrage and registration therefor to men are in violation of the Constitution of the United States, andtherefore void. The argument is that as a woman, born or naturalized in the United States and subject to thejurisdiction thereof, is a citizen of the United States and of the state in which she resides, she has the right ofsuffrage as one of the privileges and immunities of her citizenship which the state cannot by its laws orconstitution abridge.There is no doubt that women may be citizens. They are persons, and by the Fourteenth Amendment "allpersons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof' are expressly declared tobe "citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." But in our opinion it did not need thisamendment to give them that position. Before its adoption, the Constitution of the United States did not in termsprescribe who should be citizens of the United States or of the several states, yet there were necessarily suchcitizens without such provision. There cannot be a nation without a people. The very idea of a politicalcommunity such as a nation is implies anPage 88 U. S. 166


18/20

association of persons for the promotion of their general welfare. Each one of the persons associated becomes amember of the nation formed by the association. He owes it allegiance and is entitled to its protection.Allegiance and protection are in this connection reciprocal obligations. The one is a compensation for the other;allegiance for protection and protection for allegiance.For convenience, it has been found necessary to give a name to this membership. The object is to designate by atitle the person and the relation he bears to the nation. For this purpose, the words "subject," "inhabitant," and"citizen" have been used, and the choice between them is sometimes made to depend upon the form of thegovernment. Citizen is now more commonly employed, however, and as it has been considered better suited tothe description of one living under a republican government, it was adopted by nearly all of the states upon theirseparation from Great Britain, and was afterwards adopted in the Articles of Confederation and in theConstitution of the United States. When used in this sense, it is understood as conveying the idea ofmembership of a nation, and nothing more.To determine, then, who were citizens of the United States before the adoption of the amendment, it isnecessary to ascertain what persons originally associated themselves together to form the nation and what wereafterwards admitted to membership.Looking at the Constitution itself, we find that it was ordained and established by the people of the UnitedStates," [Footnote 3] and then going further back, we find that these were the people of the several states thathad before dissolved the political bands which connected them with Great Britain and assumed a separate andequal station among the powers of the earth. [Footnote 4] and that had by Articles of Confederation andPerpetual Union, in which they took the name of "the United States of America," entered into a firm league ofPage 88 U. S. 167friendship with each other for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and generalwelfare, binding themselves to assist each other against all force offered to or attack made upon them, or any ofthem, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever. [Footnote 5]Whoever, then, was one of the people of either of these states when the Constitution of the United States wasadopted became ipso facto a citizen -- a member of the nation created by its adoption. He was one of thepersons associating together to form the nation, and was consequently one of its original citizens. As to thisthere has never been a doubt. Disputes have arisen as to whether or not certain persons or certain classes ofpersons were part of the people at the time, but never as to their citizenship if they were.Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second,by naturalization. This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it provides [Footnote 6] that"No person except a natural-born citizen or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of theConstitution shall be eligible to the office of President, [Footnote 7]"and that Congress shall have power "to establish a uniform rule of naturalization." Thus, new citizens may beborn or they may be created by naturalization.The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere toascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, itwas never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upontheir birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to thecitizenship of their


19/20

Page 88 U. S. 168parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is notnecessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born ofcitizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens. The words "all children" are certainly ascomprehensive, when used in this connection, as "all persons," and if females are included in the last, they mustbe in the first. That they are included in the last is not denied. In fact, the whole argument of the plaintiffsproceeds upon that idea.Under the power to adopt a uniform system of naturalization, Congress, as early as 1790, provided "that anyalien, being a free white person," might be admitted as a citizen of the United States, and that the children ofsuch persons so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under twenty-one years of age at the timeof such naturalization, should also be considered citizens of the United States, and that the children of citizensof the United States that might be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, should beconsidered as natural-born citizens. [Footnote 8] These provisions thus enacted have in substance been retainedin all the naturalization laws adopted since. In 1855, however, the last provision was somewhat extended, andall persons theretofore born or thereafter to be born out of the limits of the jurisdiction of the United States,whose fathers were or should be at the time of their birth citizens of the United States were declared to becitizens also. [Floie 0]As early as 1804 it was enacted by Congress that when any alien who had declared his intention to become acitizen in the manner provided by law died before he was actually naturalized, his widow and children shouldbe considered as citizens of the United States and entitled to all rights and privileges as such upon taking thenecessary oath; [Footnote 1_0] and in 1855 it was further provided that any woman who might lawfully benaturalized under the existing laws, married, orPage 88 U. S. 169who should be married to a citizen of the United States should be deemed and taken to be a citizen. [Footnote

]

From this it is apparent that from the commencement of the legislation upon this subject, alien women and alienminors could be made citizens by naturalization, and we think it will not be contended that this would have beendone if it had not been supposed that native women and native minors were already citizens by birth.But if more is necessary to show that women have always been considered as citizens the same as men,abundant proof is to be found in the legislative and judicial history of the country. Thus, by the Constitution, thejudicial power of the United States is made to extend to controversies between citizens of different states. Underthis, it has been uniformly held that the citizenship necessary to give the courts of the United States jurisdictionof a cause must be affirmatively shown on the record. Its existence as a fact may be put in issue and tried. Iffound not to exist, the case must be dismissed. Notwithstanding this, the records of the courts are full of cases inwhich the jurisdiction depends upon the citizenship of women, and not one can be found, we think, in whichobjection was made on that account. Certainly none can be found in which it has been held that women couldnot sue or be sued in the courts of the United States. Again, at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, inmany of the states (and in some probably now) aliens could not inherit or transmit inheritance. There are amultitude of cases to be found in which the question has been presented whether a woman was or was not analien, and as such capable or incapable of inheritance, but in no one has it been insisted that she was not acitizen because she was a woman. On the contrary, her right to citizenship has been in all cases assumed. Theonly question has been whether, in the particular case under consideration, she had availed herself of the right.In the legislative department of the government, similar


20/20

OFFICE OF STATE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SSTATE OF GEORG IA If

DAVID P . W ELDEN,Plaintiff, D oc ke t N um b er: O SA H - SE CS TA T E -C E-

v.. 1215137-60-MALIHIB A R A C K O BA M A ,Defendant.ORDER

Plaintiff's unopposed request to continue is granted. Plaintiff's Pre-trial order andamended complaint, if any, are due December 9, 2011. Defendant's Pretrial order is dueDecember 19, 2011. If necessary, the hearing will be held January 16-18, 2012 in Atlanta. Noother continuances will be granted without good cause.

SO ORDERED, December 1, 2011.

MICHAEL M. MALIHI, Judge

2011-12-09 welden - welden proposed pre-trial order

Documents