Category Archives: Courts

Corrupt Obama Justice Dept sues NC over voter law, NC law does not discriminate, Law applies equally to all citizens, Revenge for NC rejecting Obama in 2012 elections?

Corrupt Obama Justice Dept sues NC over voter law, NC law does not discriminate, Law applies equally to all citizens, Revenge for NC rejecting Obama in 2012 elections?

“According to the 2010 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, the unemployment rate for non-Hispanic black residents in North Carolina was almost twice the rate for non-Hispanic white residents (19.2% compared to 10.5%).”…Eric Holder’s US Justice Dept lawsuit against NC

“‘the Framers of the Constitution intended the States to keep for themselves, as provided in the Tenth Amendment, the power to regulate elections.’”

“The Voting Rights Act sharply departs from these basic principles. It suspends “all changes to state election law—however innocuous—until they have been preclearedby federal authorities in Washington, D. C.” Id., at 202. States must beseech the Federal Government for permission to implement laws that they would otherwise have the right to enact and execute on their own”… Chief Justice Roberts, Shelby County, AL vs Holder, Attorney General, et al 

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

The corrupt Obama US Justice Dept. led by Obama’s pal Eric Holder is sueing the state of NC over its recent changes to the voter laws.

First of all I would like to thank Eric Holder for helping to highlight the impact of the Obama Administration on blacks in NC.
“According to the 2010 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, the unemployment rate for non-Hispanic black residents in North Carolina was almost twice the rate for non-Hispanic white residents (19.2% compared to 10.5%).”

Eric Holder claims that the new NC voting law changes are discriminatory.

“Provisions of HB 589
23. HB 589 makes several significant changes to North Carolina’s election law. Among other changes, HB 589 alters existing law by reducing the number of early voting days available to voters, eliminating same-day voter registration during the early voting period, and prohibiting the counting of provisional ballots cast by voters who attempt to vote in their county, but outside their home precinct. HB 589 also imposes a new photo identification requirement for in-person voters.

“the discriminatory impact of photo identification requirements on minority voters, and the challenges people encounter in obtaining the underlying documentation needed to acquire the types of photo identification that would be required by the proposed law.”

“Implementation of HB 589 Will Have a Discriminatory Result”

“The reduction of the number of days of early voting and elimination of the first seven days of early voting, including the first weekend days of early voting, will have a discriminatory impact on African-American voters in North Carolina.”

http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/resources/646201393013723793555.pdf

Legal definition of discrimination.
“In Constitutional Law, the grant by statute of particular privileges to a class arbitrarily designated from a sizable number of persons, where no reasonable distinction exists between the favored and disfavored classes. Federal laws, supplemented by court decisions, prohibit discrimination in such areas as employment, housing, voting rights, education, and access to public facilities. They also proscribe discrimination on the basis of race, age, sex, nationality, disability, or religion. In addition, state and local laws can prohibit discrimination in these areas and in others not covered by federal laws.”

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/discrimination

The NC voting laws are clearly not discriminatory. They apply equally to all citizens.

A fifth grader can understand that.

From Gateway Pundit September 30, 2013.

“So, will Holder sue the majority of US States?

  • 14 states allow straight party voting. North Carolina now joins the 36 other states that do not.
  • 15 states allow NO early voting or no-excuse absentee voting. (Those include NY and Mass)
  • 32 states allow early voting ranging from 4 days prior to election day to 45 days with an average 19 days. North Carolina allows 10 days but requires the same number of hours of early voting that was available in 2012 and 2010 when the early voting period was 17 days.
  • Only 1 state allows same day registration during early voting. NC was the only other state to allow this and has now joined 49 states in not allowing same day registration during early voting.
  • 11 states allow same day registration on Election Day. North Carolina does not.
  • 5 states allow 16 and 17 year olds to pre-register to vote. 45 states do not, including now, North Carolina.

Illinois and Delaware require voter ID. Hawaii has even stricter voter ID requirements. Why is Holder not suing those states?”

Read more:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/09/hyper-partisan-obama-doj-to-announce-suit-against-north-carolina-voting-laws/

FURTHERMORE

Even though the recent US Supreme Court decision in Shelby County, AL vs Holder, Attorney General, et al addressed the preclearance requirement of the Voting Rights Act, Chief Justice Roberts emphasized the constitutional provisions giving the states most of election powers.

“Outside the strictures of the Supremacy Clause, States retain broad autonomy in structuring their governments and pursuing legislative objectives. Indeed, the Constitution provides that all powers not specifically granted to the Federal Government are reserved to the States or citizens. Amdt. 10. This “allocation of powers in our federal system preserves the integrity, dignity, and residual sovereignty of the States.” Bond v. United States, 564 U. S. ___, ___
(2011) (slip op., at 9). But the federal balance “is not just an end in itself: Rather, federalism secures to citizens the liberties that derive from the diffusion of sovereign power.” Ibid. (internal quotation marks omitted).
More specifically, “‘the Framers of the Constitution intended the States to keep for themselves, as provided in the Tenth Amendment, the power to regulate elections.’” Gregory v. Ashcroft, 501 U. S. 452, 461–462 (1991) (quoting Sugarman v. Dougall, 413 U. S. 634, 647 (1973); some internal quotation marks omitted). Of course, the Federal Government retains significant control over federal elections. For instance, the Constitution authorizes Congress to establish the time and manner for electing Senators and Representatives. Art. I, §4, cl. 1; see also Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc., ante, at 4–6. But States have “broad powers to determine the conditions under which the right of suffrage may be exercised.” Carrington v. Rash, 380 U. S. 89, 91 (1965) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Arizona, ante, at 13–15. And “[e]ach State has the power to prescribe the qualifications of its officers and the manner in which they shall be chosen.” Boyd v. Nebraska ex rel. Thayer, 143 U. S. 135, 161 (1892). Drawing lines for congressional districts is likewise “primarily the duty and responsibility of the State.” Perry v. Perez, 565 U. S. ___, ___ (2012) (per curiam) (slip op., at 3)(internal quotation marks omitted).
Not only do States retain sovereignty under the Constitution, there is also a “fundamental principle of equal sovereignty” among the States. Northwest Austin, supra, at 203 (citing United States v. Louisiana, 363 U. S. 1, 16 (1960); Lessee of Pollard v. Hagan, 3 How. 212, 223 (1845); and Texas v. White, 7 Wall. 700, 725–726 (1869); emphasis added). Over a hundred years ago, this Court explained that our Nation “was and is a union of States, equal in power, dignity and authority.” Coyle v. Smith, 221 U. S. 559, 567 (1911). Indeed, “the constitutional equality of the States is essential to the harmonious operation of the scheme upon which the Republic was organized.” Id., at
580. Coyle concerned the admission of new States, and Katzenbach rejected the notion that the principle operated as a bar on differential treatment outside that context. 383 U. S., at 328–329. At the same time, as we made clear in Northwest Austin, the fundamental principle of equal sovereignty remains highly pertinent in assessing subsequent disparate treatment of States. 557 U. S., at 203.
The Voting Rights Act sharply departs from these basic principles. It suspends “all changes to state election law—however innocuous—until they have been precleared by federal authorities in Washington, D. C.” Id., at 202. States must beseech the Federal Government for permission to implement laws that they would otherwise have the right to enact and execute on their own, subject of course to any injunction in a §2 action. The Attorney General has 60 days to object to a preclearance request,longer if he requests more information. See 28 CFR §§51.9, 51.37. If a State seeks preclearance from a three judge court, the process can take years.
And despite the tradition of equal sovereignty, the Act applies to only nine States (and several additional counties). While one State waits months or years and expends funds to implement a validly enacted law, its neighbor can typically put the same law into effect immediately, through the normal legislative process. Even if a non covered jurisdiction is sued, there are important differences between those proceedings and preclearance proceedings; the preclearance proceeding “not only switches the burden of proof to the supplicant jurisdiction, but also applies substantive standards quite different from those governing the rest of the nation.” 679 F. 3d, at 884 (Williams, J., dissenting) (case below).
All this explains why, when we first upheld the Act in 1966, we described it as “stringent” and “potent.” Katzen
bach, 383 U. S., at 308, 315, 337. We recognized that it“may have been an uncommon exercise of congressional power,” but concluded that “legislative measures not otherwise appropriate” could be justified by “exceptional conditions.” Id., at 334. We have since noted that the Act “authorizes federal intrusion into sensitive areas of state and local policy making,” Lopez, 525 U. S., at 282, and represents an “extraordinary departure from the traditional course of relations between the States and the Federal Government,” Presley v. Etowah County Comm’n, 502 U. S. 491, 500–501 (1992). As we reiterated in Northwest Austin, the Act constitutes “extraordinary legislation otherwise unfamiliar to our federal system.” 557 U. S., at 211.”
Is this just another Obama administration race baiting move or retribution for NC rejecting Obama and the Democrat Party in 2012?
What a bunch of morons.
In their zeal to attack the state of NC they reveal the plight of blacks under Obama.
“According to the 2010 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, the unemployment rate for non-Hispanic black residents in North Carolina was almost twice the rate for non-Hispanic white residents (19.2% compared to 10.5%).”
Thanks to commenter Jonah.

George Zimmerman not guilty in Trayvon Martin shooting, Six female jurors deliberated 16 1/2 hours, NAACP requests Justice Department file civil rights charges

George Zimmerman not guilty in Trayvon Martin shooting, Six female jurors deliberated 16 1/2 hours, NAACP requests Justice Department file civil rights charges

“I think things would have been different if George Zimmerman were black for this reason: He never would have been charged with a crime,” …defense attorney Mark O’Mara

“The New Black Panther case was the simplest and most obvious violation of federal law I saw in my Justice Department career. Because of the corrupt nature of the dismissal, statements falsely characterizing the case and, most of all, indefensible orders for the career attorneys not to comply with lawful subpoenas investigating the dismissal, this month I resigned my position as a Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney.”…J. Christian Adams

From CNN July 13, 2013.

“George Zimmerman found not guilty of murder in Trayvon Martin’s death”

“George Zimmerman never denied shooting Trayvon Martin, but he said he did so in self defense. Late Saturday night, a Florida jury found him not guilty in the teenager’s death.

The verdict caps a case that has inflamed passions for well over a year, much of it focused on race.

The six jurors — all of them women — deliberated for 16½ hours. Five of the women are white; one is a minority.

When he heard his fate, Zimmerman had little visible reaction. He turned and shook the hand of one of his attorneys before sitting back down, smiling only after court was adjourned.”

“The jury had three choices: to find Zimmerman guilty of second-degree murder; to find him guilty of a lesser charge of manslaughter; or to find him not guilty.

For second-degree murder, the jurors would have had to believe that Martin’s unlawful killing was “done from ill will, hatred, spite or an evil intent” and would be “of such a nature that the act itself indicates an indifference to human life.”

What led jurors to this verdict?

To convict Zimmerman of manslaughter, the jurors would have had to believe he “intentionally committed an act or acts that caused the death of Trayvon Martin.” That charge could have carried a sentence of up to 30 years in prison, though the jury was not told of that possible sentence.

Ultimately, they believed Zimmerman wasn’t guilty of either charge. None of the jurors wanted to speak to the media after the verdict.”

“The NAACP has called for the Justice Department to file civil rights charges against Zimmerman and urged the public to sign a petition to support the effort.”

Read more:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/13/justice/zimmerman-trial/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

“If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be OK

But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.

And that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court-focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.”…2001 Barack Obama interview on Chicago public radio station WBEZ

Judge James Zagel FISA judge, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, Blagojevich trial judge, April order access Verizon phone records, John Roberts appointment

Judge James Zagel FISA judge, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, Blagojevich trial judge, April order access  Verizon phone records, John Roberts appointment

“Why did Judge James Zagel allow only 2 percent of the Blagojevich wiretaps to be released?”…Citizen Wells

“I can tell you that, based on court rules and procedures, Judge James Zagel carries some of the blame for the delay in the transcripts.

The question is, what was Judge Zagel’s motivation?”…Citizen Wells

From the Chicago SunTimes June 1o, 2013.

“Chicago judge Zagel sits on secret FISA surveillance court”

“U.S. District Court Judge James Zagel regularly presides over high-profile cases in Chicago — notably Rod Blagojevich’s corruption and the Family Secrets mob trials — but much lesser known is his secret role on the most secret court in the nation.

Zagel is one of 11 judges on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court — the court in the news because the April order signed by one of its judges, Roger Vinson, allowed the National Security Agency to collect tens of millions of Verizon phone records of its U.S. customers.

The court is nicknamed the “FISA Court” after the 1978 law creating it, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. A FISA Court judge approved a government request for the collection of Internet and social media records in the program code-named “PRISM.”

Combined, the Verizon and PRISM leaks have touched off a national debate about privacy and anti-terrorism surveillance in the post-9/11 era as well as whether self-admitted NSA leaker Edward Snowden — now in hiding — should be treated as a hero or a criminal, because it is only a matter of time before he faces a federal indictment.

From time to time Zagel leaves his high-ceiling courtroom in the Dirksen Federal Building in Chicago, where the public is free to observe his trials, to travel to Washington for FISA Court business at the District Court building here, a short stroll from the Capitol.

According to FISA court spokesman Sheldon Snook, the 11 FISA judges rotate one-week stints in Washington, so Zagel leaves his bench in Chicago for FISA work as part of a regular routine.

A former Justice Department attorney I talked to — who handled FISA-related matters — told me FISA court personnel work in a secret room the intelligence community calls a “SKIFF” — a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility.

A SKIFF is a windowless secure room — it may be filled with white noise to avoid eavesdropping —where a FISA Court judge such as Zagel reviews highly classified applications from Justice Department lawyers to allow surveillance.

Zagel, 72, entered this secret world on May 18, 2008, tapped for the spot by John Roberts, the chief justice of the United States who appoints all the FISA Court judges. Zagel’s term runs to May 18, 2015.”

http://www.suntimes.com/20661189-761/chicago-judge-zagel-sits-on-secret-fisa-surveillance-court.html

Thanks to commenter Bessie.

Florida election corruption bias incompetence, Secretary of State, Judges, Voeltz v Obama treatment obstruction of justice, Obama eligibility case ignored obfuscated and delayed

Florida election corruption bias incompetence, Secretary of State, Judges, Voeltz v Obama treatment obstruction of justice, Obama eligibility case ignored obfuscated and delayed

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial
department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to
particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that
rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must
decide on the operation of each.”

“If then the courts are to regard the constitution; and the
constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature;
the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the
case to which they both apply.”
“The judicial power of the United States is extended to all
cases arising under the constitution. Could it be the intention
of those who gave this power, to say that, in using it, the
constitution should not be looked into? That a case arising
under the constitution should be decided without examining the
instrument under which it arises?  This is too extravagant to
be maintained.”

“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the
constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no
rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be
inspected by him?”… Marbury versus Madison

“As a general rule the law contemplates the Secretary of State is to accept qualifying instruments from anyone who swears he is eligible and pays the qualifying fees. This rule should not be construed to require the Secretary of State to place the name of a person on the ballot who is obviously not eligible and when such lack of eligibility is known to him as the state’s chief elections officer.”…Justice Boyd, STATE EX REL. SHEVIN v. STONE, FL, August 10, 1972

I was asked recently why I had not included Florida with Alabama and Vermont supreme court challenges to Obama’s eligibility.

The reasons are simple.

First, no eligibility hearing has yet been scheduled for the FL Supreme Court. Why has the Voeltz v Obama eligibility challenge not reached the FL Supreme Court, unlike AL and VT?

Some combination of corruption, bias and incompetence within the executive, judicial and perhaps even legislative bodies of the State of Florida.

Secretary of State duty.

From the Florida statutes.

“97.012 Secretary of State as chief election officer.–The Secretary of State is the chief election officer of the state, and it is his or her responsibility to:

(1) Obtain and maintain uniformity in the interpretation and implementation of the election laws.”

OATH OF OFFICE
(Art. II. § 5(b), Fla. Const.)

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, protect, and defend the Constitution and Government of the United States and of the State of Florida; that I am duly qualified to hold office under the Constitution of the State, and that I will well and faithfully perform the duties of”

THE STATES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PRIMARIES, GENERAL ELECTION AND EVENTS THROUGH THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTE.

US Constitution
Article II
Section 1

“Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.”

From page 2 of the Florida “2012 Federal Qualifying Handbook”

“PART II: PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT

Qualifications

1. Must be a natural born citizen of the United States.
2. Must be at least 35 years of age.
3. Must be a resident of the United States for 14 years.”

“Must be” is not a suggestion.

Florida Election statutes

“Title IX

102.168 Contest of election.–
“(1) Except as provided in s. 102.171, the certification of election or nomination of any person to office, or of the result on any question submitted by referendum, may be contested in the circuit court by any unsuccessful candidate for such office or nomination thereto or by any elector qualified to vote in the election related to such candidacy, or by any taxpayer, respectively.

(2) Such contestant shall file a complaint, together with the fees prescribed in chapter 28, with the clerk of the circuit court within 10 days after midnight of the date the last board responsible for certifying the results officially certifies the results of the election being contested.

(3) The complaint shall set forth the grounds on which the contestant intends to establish his or her right to such office or set aside the result of the election on a submitted referendum. The grounds for contesting an election under this section are:”

“(b) Ineligibility of the successful candidate for the nomination or office in dispute.”

The FL Secretary of State has a ministerial duty in the elections.

Ministerial defined.

Merriam Webster.

a : being or having the characteristics of an act or duty prescribed by law as part of the duties of an administrative office
b : relating to or being an act done after ascertaining the existence of a specified state of facts in obedience to a legal order without exercise of personal judgment or discretion.

Legal dictionary.

“Ministerial describes an act or a function that conforms to an instruction or a prescribed procedure. It connotes obedience. A ministerial act or duty is a function performed without the use of judgment by the person performing the act or duty.”

Obedience is the common denominator. To a legal order or conforming “to an instruction or a prescribed procedure.”

This includes the US Constitution and US Code.

Furthermore.

Justice Boyd in STATE EX REL. SHEVIN v. STONE from August 10, 1972 states:

“As a general rule the law contemplates the Secretary of State is to accept qualifying instruments from anyone who swears he is eligible and pays the qualifying fees. This rule should not be construed to require the Secretary of State to place the name of a person on the ballot who is obviously not eligible and when such lack of eligibility is known to him as the state’s chief elections officer. The burden of litigating the matter should be upon the one seeking to qualify.”

Response from FL elected officials and judges.

From Citizen Wells February 1, 2012.

A  challenger discovered this recently.

“Below and attached is a scanned copy of the letter I just received from the Secretary of State, AKA Florida Supervisor of Elections, in response to the Obama Ballot Challenge I filed 9 January 2012 with him and Attorney General Pam Bundi. The Constitution of the State of Florida (1838) and as amended through 2008 and by adoption of the 2012 Federal Qualifying Handbook (October 2011) the State of Florida has accepted the qualifications for President and Vice President listed therein, based solely on the Certifications of Qualifications from the Political Parties.Read carefully, looks like we have no protection from fraud by either Party. Still waiting for response from the Attorney General.

Vern H. Goding, Ret. OathKeeper.
Melbourne Village, Fl 32904″

Response from Gary Holland, Assistant General Counsel.

“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 candidates’s ineligibility for the office sought. Such contest must be brought within 10 days of the date the last board responsibe for certifiying the results officially ceetified the results of the election being contested.”

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/02/01/fl-primary-opens-door-to-obama-eligibilty-challenge-florida-statutes-allow-contest-10-day-window-circuit-court-obama-natural-born-citizen-deficiency/

Read the entire response from Assistant General Counsel Holland here:

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/sunshine-state-shenanigans

Voeltz v Obama was presented before 2 courts in FL. I will leave it to the reader to decide what combination of corruption, bias and incompetence applies to the judges.

Michael Voeltz filed a contest of election in Leon County Circuit Court on February 15, 2012.

A motion to dismiss from Obama and Secretary of State Ken Detzner was granted by Judge Terry Lewis on June 29, 2012.

The entire response from Judge Lewis will not be evaluated at this time. However, enough of the judge’s suspect reasoning will be presented to raise eyebrows.

Judge Lewis presents a flawed description of Natural Born Citizen and quotes a flawed decision in Akeny v Governor of Indiana. That is scary enough.

The next example is clearly more black and white.

Judge Lewis quotes a small portion of Cherry v Stone from August 4, 1972. This is not the better ruling to quote and not the latest.

From STATE EX REL. SHEVIN v. STONE from August 10, 1972.
“The resign law is not Secretary Stone’s to administer by such a determination, any more than the campaign spending law. His charge under the constitution and statute does not extend to the substance or correctness or enforcement of a sworn compliance with the law — with “matters in pais”, as it were. Once the candidate states his compliance, under oath, the Secretary’s ministerial determination of eligibility for the office is at an end. Any challenge to the correctness of the candidate’s statement of compliance is for appropriate judicial determination upon any challenge properly made, as here.”

Justice Boyd adds

“I agree with the majority opinion disposing of Miller and Wright.

As a general rule the law contemplates the Secretary of State is to accept qualifying instruments from anyone who swears he is eligible and pays the qualifying fees. This rule should not be construed to require the Secretary of State to place the name of a person on the ballot who is obviously not eligible and when such lack of eligibility is known to him as the state’s chief elections officer. The burden of litigating the matter should be upon the one seeking to qualify.

The Attorney General is properly bringing this action as the Attorney for the State. Few matters in a democracy can be of greater importance to the people than those relating to qualifications of candidates for public office.”

From above:

“Once the candidate states his compliance, under oath, the Secretary’s ministerial determination of eligibility for the office is at an end.”

No oath, no written compliance with the law was provided by Obama.

Plaintiff Voeltz took the case to the Second Judicial Circuit Court of Leon County.

On December 20, 2012 Judge Kevin Carroll dismissed the complaint with prejudice.

Judge Carroll states that “the Electoral College met and voted on December 17, 2012.”

“this court cannot now alter the Electoral College process.”

How convenient, the state of FL dragged out this process instead of acting and expediting it.

Judge Carroll also states:

“the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit, in and for Leon County, Florida does not have jurisdiction to determine the issue of qualification for the Office of President of the United States, particularly at this date in the process.”

Judge Carroll paraphrases “Miracle on 34th Street”, that the US government recognizes Obama as president and again with the element of elapsed time as if that was prohibitive.

Judge Carroll is wrong and should be impeached!

Let’s go through some of the references to the president and candidates in general not being qualified. There are mechanisms in place for removing them from office.

At the state level, the federal government gives the states the power to control elections through the submission of the electoral count to congress.

The State election officials are not prohibited from questioning eligibility.

Even in FL, as noted above:

“Once the candidate states his compliance, under oath, the Secretary’s ministerial determination of eligibility for the office is at an end.”

From 2 southeastern states:

NORTH CAROLINA

NC Statute § 163-114.  Filling vacancies among party nominees occurring after nomination and before election.

“If any person nominated as a candidate of a political party for one of the offices listed below (either in a primary or convention or by virtue of having no opposition in a primary) dies, resigns, or for any reason becomes ineligible or disqualified before the date of the ensuing general election, the vacancy shall be filled by appointment according to the following instructions:
Position

President 

Vacancy is to be filled by appointment of national executive
committee of political party in which vacancy occurs”

GEORGIA

§ 21-2-5.  Qualifications of candidates for federal and state office; determination of qualifications
“(a) Every candidate for federal and state office who is certified by the state executive committee of a political party or who files a notice of candidacy shall meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.

(b) The Secretary of State upon his or her own motion may challenge the qualifications of any candidate at any time prior to the election of such candidate. Within two weeks after the deadline for qualifying, any elector who is eligible to vote for a candidate may challenge the qualifications of the candidate by filing a written complaint with the Secretary of State giving the reasons why the elector believes the candidate is not qualified to seek and hold the public office for which he or she is offering. Upon his or her own motion or upon a challenge being filed, the Secretary of State shall notify the candidate in writing that his or her qualifications are being challenged and the reasons therefor and shall advise the candidate that he or she is requesting a hearing on the matter before an administrative law judge of the Office of State Administrative Hearings pursuant to Article 2 of Chapter 13 of Title 50 and shall inform the candidate of the date, time, and place of the hearing when such information becomes available. The administrative law judge shall report his or her findings to the Secretary of State.”

Electoral college vote.

UNITED STATES CODE

TITLE 3 THE PRESIDENT

Manner of voting

§ 8.   The electors shall vote for President and Vice President, respectively, in the manner directed by the Constitution.

Congress certifies electoral count.

“If any objections to the Electoral College vote are made, they must be submitted in writing and be signed by at least one member of the House and one Senator. If objections are presented, the House and Senate withdraw to their respective chambers to consider their merits under procedures set out in federal law.”

After the certification, the Constitution reveals the protocol for dealing with a president or candidate who is not qualified.

AMENDMENT XX

“Section 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall
end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators
and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January,
of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article
had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall
then begin.

Section 2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every
year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of
January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

Section 3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of
the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice
President elect shall become President. If a President shall not
have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his
term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then
the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President
shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the
case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect
shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President,
or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and
such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice
President shall have qualified.”

AMENDMENT XXV

“Section 1. In case of the removal of the President from office or
of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become
President.

Section 2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice
President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall
take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of
Congress.

Section 3. Whenever the President transmits to the President pro
tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of
Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to
discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he
transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such
powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as
Acting President.

Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either
the principal officers of the executive departments or of such
other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the
President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House
of Representatives their written declaration that the President is
unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice
President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the
office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro
tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of
Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists,
he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the
Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of
the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by
law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore
of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their
written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the
powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide
the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if
not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after
receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not
in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to
assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the
President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his
office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as
Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers
and duties of his office.”

As you see, there are laws and procedures in place from early in the nomination process and past inauguration to remedy a president or candidate who is not eligible.

It is a damn shame that we have judges and election officials in Florida and other states who shirk their constitutional duties and make such idiotic statements.

For more information and commentary visit.

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/

Vermont Supreme Court Obama eligibility case, Obama not natural born citizen due to foreign father, H. Brooke Paige, Vattel Law of Nations cited

Vermont Supreme Court Obama eligibility case, Obama not natural born citizen due to foreign father, H. Brooke Paige, Vattel Law of Nations cited

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial
department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to
particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that
rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must
decide on the operation of each.”

“If then the courts are to regard the constitution; and the
constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature;
the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the
case to which they both apply.”
“The judicial power of the United States is extended to all
cases arising under the constitution. Could it be the intention
of those who gave this power, to say that, in using it, the
constitution should not be looked into? That a case arising
under the constitution should be decided without examining the
instrument under which it arises?  This is too extravagant to
be maintained.”

“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the
constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no
rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be
inspected by him?”… Marbury versus Madison

From the Burlington Free Press April 23, 2013.

“Vt. Supreme Court hears case challenging legality of Barack Obama’s run for re-election”

“President Barack Obama may be the “de facto” president of the United States, but that doesn’t mean he was elected legally, a former Republican U.S. Senate hopeful told the Vermont Supreme Court on Tuesday.

H. Brooke Paige, appearing without a lawyer before the state’s highest court, said Obama does not meet what the framers of the U.S. Constitution meant when they decreed that a person holding the presidency must be a “natural born citizen.”

Paige has contended historical papers that the framers relied on at the time the Constitution was written indicated a natural-born citizen was someone who was born of parents who were both American citizens. Obama’s father, now deceased, was a citizen of Kenya.

The argument was rejected by Washington Superior Court Judge Robert Bent in a ruling in November. Bent, in a seven-page decision, said Paige had no real proof to support his definition of the term natural-born citizen.

Paige, of the town of Washington, appealed to decision to the high court. At Tuesday’s hearing he told the justices he was not challenging Obama’s citizenship, as the so-called “birthers” group has contended.

“Don’t pay any attention to them,” he told the justices. “The birther argument is just a sheer flight of fancy.”

Obama, who was named in Paige’s original lawsuit, was not represented at Tuesday’s hearing. Paige said he was unable to get anyone to successfully serve Obama with his lawsuit, a predicament Justice John Dooley said concerned him.

“How can the court issue an order when he is not a party to the case,” Dooley asked. Paige said Obama “chose not to be present” and that copies of all of the filings in the case had been sent by registered mail to the White House.”

“As the hearing ended, Paige called out to the justices and began walking toward them as they were departing the courtroom, hoping to give each of them copies of “The Law of Nations,” the 867-page book first published in 1773 by Emer de Vattel.

Paige has claimed the framers relied on “The Law of Nations” when they inserted the term natural born citizens into the Constitution as a presidential requirement.”

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2013304230018&nclick_check=1

The media and the Obama camp have striven to obfuscate the eligibility issue  and malign anyone questioning Obama. Therefore it comes as no surprise that Mr. Paige ( or possibly the reporter ) made several inaccurate statements.

First of all, no one is questioning Obama’s citizenship. After all, we will give that to anyone.

It is the Natural Born Citizen requirement for the presidency that is the concern. Mr. Paige accurately questions Obama’s status because he did not have 2 US citizen parents.

The other concern is Obama’s birthplace, which has not yet been proven. The Sheriff Joe Arpaio investigation is moving forward with evidence that the purported birth certificate image placed on Whitehouse.gov is fraudulent. It is believed that they will cooperate in a pending Alabama Supreme Court case.

Blagojevich appeal opening brief April 25, 2013, Or more delays?, Attorneys Goodman and Kaeseberg, What were Obama and Blagojevich discussing in 2008?

Blagojevich appeal opening brief April 25, 2013, Or more delays?, Attorneys Goodman and Kaeseberg, What were Obama and Blagojevich discussing in 2008?

“Why wasn’t Rod Blagojevich, Governor of IL, prosecuted before Tony Rezko, a businessman?”…Citizen Wells

“Why did Patrick Fitzgerald and the US Justice Department wait until December 2008 to arrest Rod Blagojevich?”…Citizen Wells

“Regardless of how this plays out, it benefits Obama. If there is no appeal or the appeal is denied, Blagojevich will be sequestered. If the appeal proceeds, it could drag out beyond impacting the 2012 election cycle. The intent is obvious.”…Citizen Wells, July 19, 2011

Barack Obama has been protected from the beginning of the prosecution in “Operation Board Games” involving a host of Obama Chicago corruption cronies such as Tony Rezko, Stuart Levine and of course Rod Blagojevich.

From FBI wiretaps of Blagojevich on November 12, 2008.

“this guy is more Tony’d up than I am. …. they got the Chicago media to f…ing make me wear Rezko more. To f…ing dilute it from him”

“BLAGOJEVICH: You know, Axelrod and Obama’s people, you know, clearly turned, you know, got the Chicago media to make Rezko all about me. And hardly about…

HARRIS: Yeah, in other words, they focus their,they focus their attention on you. They couldn’t make it go away so the bes-, next best strategy is deflect it.

BLAGOJEVICH: Right.

HARRIS: This is somewhere where it, it’ll satisfy the, the hunger of the beast, being the media.

BLAGOJEVICH: Right, right.

HARRIS: Yeah, it makes sense. It’s not a stretch. If I’m, if I’m his message advisor, media advisor or whatever, operative, yeah I’m gonna try to feed the beast by giving ‘em something else to eat on.”

What were Obama and Blagojevich discussing just after the 2008 election?

ObamaBlagoNov2008

And…..

“Why wasn’t Rod Blagojevich, the Governor of Illinois, wiretapped at least by 2005 when it was known in 2003 that there was widespread corruption in his administration?”

From Politico March 15, 2013.

“And next up for the former governor, Goodman said, is his case on appeal in the 7th Circuit. Blagojevich’s opening brief is due April 25, Goodman noted.

“He is hopeful that his appeal will be successful and that his conviction will be overturned,” Goodman wrote.”

“Goodman, meanwhile, said he is currently busy working his way through thousands of pages of trial transcript as he works on Blagojevich’s appeal.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/rod-blagojevich-jail-88904.html?hp=r6

From Chicago CBS local September 14, 2012.

“Attorneys Think Blagojevich’s Sentence Will Be Reversed On Appeal”

“Attorneys in the first trial of former Gov. Rod Blagojevich still keep in touch with him, and think his sentence will be reversed on appeal if the case ever gets there.

As WBBM Newsradio’s Alex Degman reports, the team of Sam Adam Jr. and his father, Sam Adam Sr., say the Blagojevich appeal is taking forever to get to court.

LISTEN: WBBM Newsradio’s Alex Degman reports
“We’re just waiting to get to the appeal,” Adam Jr. said. “I don’t know if you guys know this, that the appellate record has not been made yet. We still do not have the transcripts. It’s been two years since our trial, and a year since the second trial.”
Adam Sr. says there is a good chance the former governor will be freed if all the evidence is presented.

“The judge would not let him play his tapes… there had tapes in both trials that would have established his innocence. The judge wouldn’t let us play them,” he said.”

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/09/14/attorneys-think-blagojevichs-sentence-will-be-reversed-on-appeal/

Alabama Supreme Court ruling on Obama eligibility, Attorney Larry Klayman appeal, Obama natural born citizen status questioned, AL Supreme Court all Republican, Constitution upheld?

Alabama Supreme Court ruling on Obama eligibility, Attorney Larry Klayman appeal, Obama natural born citizen status questioned, AL Supreme Court all Republican, Constitution upheld?

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the
constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no
rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be
inspected by him?”… Marbury versus Madison

 

Attorney Larry Klayman has filed an appeal with the Alabama Supreme Court regarding the failure of Secretary of State Beth Chapman to verify that all candidates on the state’s 2012 ballot were eligible to serve.

“Roy Moore was elected chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court last November, a decade after he defied a federal order to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the state Supreme Court building.

 Now, 2012 Constitution Party presidential nominee Virgil Goode and Alabama Republican Party leader Hugh McInnish are asking the state’s highest court to force Secretary of State Beth Chapman to verify that all candidates on the state’s 2012 ballot were eligible to serve.
Attorney Larry Klayman, founder of the Washington, D.C.-watch dog Judicial Watch and now head of Freedom Watch, filed the appeal Tuesday with the Alabama Supreme Court, asking for oral arguments.”
Read more:
All members of the AL Supreme Court are Republican.
Does this mean that the US Constitution will be followed and upheld?
Here is the makeup of the court.

“Founded in 1819 as provided in the state constitution, the Alabama Supreme Court is the state’s court of last resort.

Justices

The current justices of the court are:

Judge Term Appointed by Party
Chief Justice Roy Moore 2001-2003; 2013-2018 Republican
Justice Lyn Stuart 2000-2018 Republican
Justice Michael Bolin 2005-2016 Republican
Justice Tom Parker 2004-2016 Republican
Justice Glenn Murdock 2006-2018 Republican
Justice Greg Shaw 2008-2014 Republican
Justice Kelli Wise 2011-2016 Republican
Justice Tommy Bryan 2013-2018 Republican
Justice James Allen Main 2011-2018 Gov. Bob Riley Republican

Jurisdiction

The Supreme Court has jurisdiction to review the decisions reached by lower courts within the state. It is also authorized to review matters of contention where the dollar amount in question exceeds $50,000 (if no other Alabama court has jurisdiction), review cases over which no other state court has jurisdiction, and appeals from the Alabama Public Service Commission. The Supreme Court has a supervisory role over the other courts in the state and is charged with making rules governing administration, practice and procedure in all courts.”

Read more:

http://judgepedia.org/index.php/Alabama_Supreme_Court

Chief Justice

Chief Justice

Roy S. Moore

2013 – Present

Alabama Judicial System Appellate Courts Supreme Court of Alabama Chief Justice Moore

Chief Justice Roy S. Moore graduated from Etowah High School in Attalla, Alabama, in 1965, and from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point in 1969. He served in the U.S. Army as a company commander with the Military Police Corps in Vietnam. Chief Justice Moore completed his Juris Doctor degree from the University of Alabama School of Law in 1977.

During his legal career, Chief Justice Moore became the first full-time Deputy District Attorney in Etowah County, Alabama, and served in this position from 1977 until 1982. In 1984, Chief Justice Moore undertook private practice of law in Gadsden, Alabama.

In 1992, Chief Justice Moore became a judge of the Sixteenth Judicial Circuit of Alabama and served until his election as Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court in 2000. In 2003, Chief Justice Moore was removed from his position by a judicial panel for refusing to remove a Ten Commandments monument that he installed in the rotunda of the Alabama Judicial Building to acknowledge the sovereignty of God.

From 2003 until 2012, Chief Justice Moore served as President of the Foundation for Moral Law in Montgomery, speaking throughout the Country and filing amicus curiae briefs regarding the United States Constitution in Federal District Courts, State Supreme Courts, U.S. Courts of Appeal and the United States Supreme Court.

Chief Justice Moore was overwhelmingly re-elected by a vote of the people of Alabama as Chief Justice in November of 2012 and took office in January of 2013.

Chief Justice Moore and his wife Kayla have four children and three grandchildren. They are members of First Baptist Church in Gallant, Alabama.

Associate Justice

Lyn Stuart , Associate Justice

Lyn Stuart

2001 – Present

Lyn Stuart is a native of Atmore, Alabama, attended public schools and graduated from Escambia County High School. She received a Bachelor of Arts degree in Sociology and Education from Auburn University with high honor in 1977 and her Juris Doctorate degree from The University of Alabama School of Law in 1980. She served as Secretary of the Student Bar Association, was a member of the John A. Campbell Moot Court Board and received the Dean’s Service Award at graduation

Upon graduation from law school Justice Stuart worked as an Assistant Attorney General for the State of Alabama under former Attorney General Charles Graddick. She also served as Executive Assistant to the Commissioner and Special Assistant Attorney General for the State Department of Corrections. Upon moving to Baldwin County, she became an Assistant District Attorney for Baldwin County on the staff of District Attorney David Whetstone.

In 1988, she was elected District Judge, and was re-elected in 1994. Governor Fob James appointed Justice Stuart to the Circuit bench in January 1997. She was elected, without opposition, to a six year term in 1998.

Justice Stuart was invited and served as a Faculty Advisor at the National Judicial College in Reno, Nevada. She is a past president of the Alabama Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. She has served as a national speaker for the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, training judges and other professionals on the handling of child abuse and neglect cases. She served as President of the Blue Ridge Institute for Juvenile and Family Court Judges in 2002.

Justice Stuart and her husband, George, have two sons, Tucker and Shepard, and a daughter, Kelly. She is a member and past president of several civic organizations: the Heritage Junior Women’s Club, the Bay Minette Kiwanis Club; and the Jubilee Woman’s Club. She serves on the Board of Directors of the Alabama Federation of Women’s Clubs. Lyn and George are members of the First United Methodist Church of Bay Minette, where Lyn has served as a member of the Administrative Board and the Board of Trustees, and teaches a young adult Sunday School class.

Associate Justice

Michael F. Bolin , Associate Justice

Michael F. Bolin

2005 – Present

Michael F. Bolin was born in, and a lifetime resident of, Jefferson County, Alabama. He attended elementary school in Birmingham, being accepted into the first magnet school for scholastic achievement. He then attended Homewood Junior High School, and graduated from Shades Valley High School in 1966 as a member of the National Honor Society. In 1970, he received his B.S. in Business Administration from Samford University. In 1973, he received his J.D. from Cumberland School of Law, graduating cum laude. At Cumberland, he was on the Dean’s List and served as Associate Editor of the Cumberland-Samford Law Review. He was later inducted into Curia Honors, Cumberland’s leadership and honor society.

Justice Bolin was a practicing attorney in Birmingham from 1973 through 1988, when he was elected as Probate Judge of Jefferson County. He was re-elected to that position in 1994 and 2000. He served in that position until his election to the Alabama Supreme Court in 2004, and began serving as an Associate Justice in January 2005.

Justice Bolin was active in the Alabama Probate Judges Association, serving as chairman of various association committees. He was elected by his peers as President, Secretary, and Treasurer of the Probate Judges Association. He served on the Children’s Code Committee, Probate Procedures Committee, Adoption Committee, and Paternity Committee of the Alabama Law Institute. He authored the Putative Father Registry law in Alabama, which protects the rights of all parties in adoption proceedings. He received the national award from the “Angels of Adoption” organization in Washington, D.C. in 2000 for his service to adoptive families. He additionally served as Chief Election Official, Chairman of the Alabama Electronic Voting Committee, and as Vice Chairman of the Governor’s Commission on Consolidation, Efficiency, and Funding in 2003. He is a member of the Vestavia-Hoover Kiwanis Club.

Justice Bolin and his wife, Rosemary, have one daughter, Leigh Anne. They attend St. Peter the Apostle Church in Hoover.

Associate Justice


Tom Parker , Associate Justice

Tom Parker

2005 – Present

Justice Tom Parker was first elected to the Alabama Supreme Court in 2004 and then re-elected in 2010.

He previously was the Deputy Administrative Director of Courts, where he served as General Counsel for the Alabama court system, advising trial court judges, and as the Director of the Alabama Judicial College, providing training for new judges and continuing legal education for all the trial judges in Alabama.  He also served as the Legal Adviser to the Chief Justice.

Parker graduated cum laude from Dartmouth College, in Hanover, New Hampshire, and received his Juris Doctorate from Vanderbilt University School of Law, in Nashville, Tennessee.  He won a Rotary International Fellowship to study law at the University of Sao Paulo School of Law, in Sao Paulo, Brazil, where he was the first foreign student in Brazil’s most prestigious law school.

Justice Parker served in the Alabama Attorney General’s Office under then Alabama Attorneys General Jeff Sessions and Bill Pryor.  As an Assistant Attorney General, he handled death penalty cases, criminal appeals, and constitutional litigation.  He has extensive experience in writing appellate briefs and with oral arguments before the Supreme Court and the Court of Criminal Appeals.  Previously, he was a partner in Parker & Kotouc, P.C., a Montgomery law firm that handled many high-profile constitutional cases.

Tom Parker was founding Executive Director of the Alabama Family Alliance (now the Alabama Policy Institute) and, later, the founding Executive Director for the Alabama Family Advocates, which were state organizations associated with Dr. James Dobson and Focus on the Family.  He lobbied for family values in the Alabama Legislature.  Parker has appeared on Focus on the Family, with Dr. James Dobson, The 700 Club, with Dr. Pat Robertson, the McNeil-Leher News Hour, For the Record, and numerous radio programs around the country.

Justice Parker is a Montgomery native — the son of the late Tommy Parker and Gloria Parker Pennington, and the step-son of the late Harry L. Pennington of Huntsville.  He was elected Student Body President at Montgomery’s Sidney Lanier High School and Speaker of the House of both YMCA Youth Legislature and Boys’ State.

Justice Parker and his wife, the former Dottie James of Auburn, have been married for 31 years. Dottie served as Supervisor of the Alabama Governor’s Mansion during the administration of Alabama Governor Fob James.  They are members of Frazer Memorial United Methodist Church.

Associate Justice

Glenn Murdock , Associate Justice

Glenn Murdock

2007 – Present

Glenn Murdock was born in Enterprise, Alabama, on June 25, 1956. He is the oldest of three children of Billy A. Murdock and the late Marita Huey Murdock.

After graduating from Enterprise High School in 1974, Justice Murdock attended The University of Alabama, where he served as Student Government Vice President. He graduated Phi Beta Kappa and summa cum laude in 1978, with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Science and Economics. He received his Juris Doctorate degree in 1981 from the University of Virginia Law School.

Upon returning to Alabama, Justice Murdock served for a year as a law clerk to the late Clarence W. Allgood, United District Judge for the Northern District of Alabama. Thereafter, he engaged in private practice, emphasizing commercial, constitutional, and election law. He also served as in-house counsel to a national corporation and as a State Administrative Law Judge. His practice included cases before the state and federal courts of Alabama, as well as the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. In 1994 and 1995, he served as an attorney to The Honorable Perry O. Hooper, Sr., in the successful year-long federal court litigation to establish the lawful winner of the 1994 Alabama Chief Justice election.

In 2000, Justice Murdock was elected to the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals, where he served from January 2001 to January 2007. He was elected to the Alabama Supreme Court in 2006 and began serving on that Court in January 2007.

Justice Murdock has been married for 30 years to the former Margaret Gilchrist of Hartselle, Alabama. They have three children and they are active members of Covenant Presbyterian Church of Birmingham. Justice Murdock is a member of the Rotary Club of Birmingham and the Birmingham and American Bar Associations.

Associate Justice

Greg Shaw , Associate Justice

Greg Shaw

2009 – Present
Court of Criminal Appeals
2001 – 2009

Justice James Gregory “Greg” Shaw, the son of James Hubert and Ruth Cooper Shaw, was born in 1957 and raised in Birmingham, where he graduated from Banks High School. The Shaw family roots extend into neighboring Shelby County, where his father, a retired businessman and a long-time member of the KeyMasters Gospel Quartet, was born and raised. To this day, the Shaw family name in Alabama is synonymous with great gospel singing.

Justice Shaw graduated from Auburn University in 1979, receiving a B.S. degree with a major in Chemistry. He is married to S. Samantha “Sam” Shaw, the daughter of June Daly Slimp and the late William M. Slimp of Homewood. Justice Shaw met Sam while at Auburn, and they married in August 1980, just before Justice Shaw’s second year of law school. Sam was elected Alabama’s State Auditor in 2006.

In 1982, Justice Shaw graduated in the top 10% of his class from Samford University’s Cumberland School of Law. While at Cumberland, he received the American Jurisprudence Award for excellence in the study of evidence under Professor Charles Gamble, the author of the preeminent evidence treatise in Alabama.

After his admission to the Alabama State Bar in 1982, Justice Shaw worked with a small law firm in St. Clair County. He later started his own general law practice in Birmingham. In the fall of 1984, Justice Shaw joined the staff of Supreme Court Associate Justice Janie L. Shores and moved to Montgomery. After serving as Justice Shores’s staff attorney for one year, he joined the staff of Supreme Court Associate Justice James Gorman Houston, Jr., in the fall of 1985, where he served as Justice Houston’s senior staff attorney for over 15 years. Justice Shaw was elected to the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals in 2000 and was reelected to that Court in 2006. On March 16, 2007, Justice Shaw was appointed Chief Judge of the Alabama Court of the Judiciary. Justice Shaw served on both the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals and the Alabama Court of the Judiciary until January 20, 2009, when, after being elected in 2008, he assumed the office of Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama.

Justice Shaw completed the Master of Laws Program at the University of Virginia School of Law in 2004, receiving the degree of Master of Laws (LL.M.) in the Judicial Process. He graduated with 30 other state and federal judges selected nationwide and he is one of only 3 judges from Alabama to participate in the program. Justice Shaw is an Honorary Master of the Bench of the Hugh Maddox Inn of Court in Montgomery, and the Alabama State Bar’s Committee on Archives and History.

Justice and Mrs. Shaw have two sons. Gregory is a Captain in the United States Army. Captain Shaw graduated from the United States Military Academy at West Point in 2007 with a degree in engineering. Christopher, “CJ,” graduated in May 2009 from Georgia Tech with an honors degree in Mechanical Engineering. Justice Shaw and Sam live in Montgomery, where they are members of Frazer Memorial United Methodist Church.

Associate Justice

James Allen Main, Judge

James Allen Main

2011 – Present
Court of Criminal Appeals
2009 – 2011

James Allen (Jim) Main currently serves as a Justice on the Supreme Court of Alabama having previously served as a Judge on the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals. He also served as Director of Finance for the State of Alabama. The Finance Director is the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of the state, as well as policy advisor to the Governor.

Prior to becoming Finance Director in 2004, Judge Main served as Senior Counsel to Gov. Riley and Chief of Staff and Legal Advisor to Gov. Fob James. Other public service includes terms as Anniston City Attorney, Lineville City Judge and City Attorney for Oxford, Alabama.

Judge Main was in private law practice in Anniston (beginning in 1972) and Montgomery (beginning in 1989). During the 30+ years of active practice of law, he was counsel in numerous precedent-setting cases before the Alabama Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court.

Judge Main is a member of a number of professional organizations including the Alabama Bar Association where he is a founding Fellow of the Alabama Law Foundation, past-President of the American Pharmacists Association, past-President of the Alabama Pharmacy Association, past-Chairman of the Dean’s Counsel for the Auburn School of Pharmacy, a past member of the Alabama Commission on Higher Education and a science and technology fellow of the Advanced Science and Technology Adjudication (ASTAR). He is actively involved in his local church and has served as Sunday school teacher, deacon and short-term missionary.

Judge Main has received numerous awards, including the Parke Davis Leadership Award; the Bowl of Hygeia, the most widely recognized international symbol for the profession of pharmacy today; the Distinguished Alumnus Award from Auburn University School of Pharmacy; the President’s Award from the American Society of Pharmacy and Law; and member of Alabama Healthcare Hall of Fame Class of 2012. He has long served on various local and state boards and commissions and was named Outstanding Young Man of Anniston in 1975 for his contribution to the community.

He has been married to Gale for 46 years, is the father of Jay Main, Saxon Main and Ashley Parker and the proud grandfather of Mary Katherine, Mac, McLeod, Tom and Walker.

Judge Main received a bachelor of science (B.S.) degree in pharmacy from Auburn University and a juris doctorate (JD) degree from the University of Alabama.

Associate Justice

Alisa Kelli Wise, Presiding Judge

Alisa Kelli Wise

2011 – Present
Court of Criminal Appeals
2001 – 2011

Justice A. Kelli Wise, the daughter of Colonel Bobby W. Wise and the late Betty Mathis Wise, was born in Geneva, Alabama and raised in Dale and Autauga County.

Judge Wise, a graduate of Prattville High School, received a B.S. in Biology, with a minor in Nursing, from Auburn University in 1985 and a Juris Doctorate from Jones School of Law in 1994. She earned a Master of Public Administration from Auburn University Montgomery in 2000 and was named the 2005 Outstanding Graduate by the AUM Department of Political Science and Public Administration. Recently, Justice Wise was named as one of AUM’s Top 40 in 40 during the University’s 40th Anniversary Celebration.

During her legal career, Justice Wise worked in the Governor’s Legislative Office (James Administration), served as legal counsel for ProStaff HRM, Inc. and was associated with the law firms of John Taber & Associates and Pittman, Pittman, Carwie & Fuquay. Prior to her election to the bench, she served as a staff attorney on the Court of Criminal Appeals and the Alabama Supreme Court. Justice Wise was first elected to the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals in 2000 becoming the youngest woman elected to sit on an Alabama Appellate Court. She was re-elected to the court in 2006 and became Presiding Judge of the Court of Criminal Appeals in 2008. While on the bench Judge Wise has written and reviewed over 20,000 cases including key appellate decisions that ultimately helped to protect victims and strengthened Alabama’s criminal laws. Justice Wise was elected to the Alabama Supreme Court in 2010 where she received the highest vote of any contested statewide candidate.

Committed to helping at-risk children, Justice Wise was appointed by Governor Bob Riley to serve on the Alabama Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention in 2003 and reappointed in 2006. She is involved in several civic, charitable and professional organizations including the Alabama State Bar Association, The Alabama Wildlife Federation, The Montgomery Symphony League and the Capital City Republican Women. Justice Wise currently serves on the Alabama Law Institute Criminal Code committee tasked with helping to re-write the Alabama Criminal Code, and the Advisory Committee on Criminal Procedure. In addition, Justice Wise is active in the Montgomery Junior League and serves on the board of directors for the Family Sunshine Center, Distinguished Young Women of Alabama and Max Credit Union.

Judge Wise and her husband Arthur Ray, a former Montgomery County District Court Judge, are the proud parents of Hanah-Mathis, a fifth grader at St. James School. They are active members of St. James United Methodist Church.

Justice

Tommy Bryan, Justice

Tommy Bryan

2013 – Present
Court of Civil Appeals
2005 – 2013

Tommy Elias Bryan was raised on a family farm in Crenshaw County, Alabama, where his parents taught him the values of faith, family, and hard work. He is the son of Margie Spivey Bryan and the late Elias Daniel Bryan.

A 1974 graduate of Brantley High School, Justice Bryan continued his education at Troy State University, where he received Bachelor of Science and Master of Science degrees in education. In 1983, he graduated from Jones School of Law. After graduating from law school, Justice Bryan served as a staff attorney for the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals.

In 1987, Justice Bryan became an assistant attorney general for the State of Alabama, serving as an associate general counsel for Alabama’s environmental department. In this position he gained valuable experience in defending and interpreting highly technical and scientific regulations and standards, as well as drafting administrative orders and reviewing legislation pertaining to environmental issues.

In 2004, Justice Bryan successfully campaigned for a seat on the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals and was sworn into office as a Judge on that court in January 2005. Justice Bryan was victorious in his own reelection effort to the Court of Civil Appeals in November 2010. In 2012, Justice Bryan was elected to the Alabama Supreme Court. Also, in 2012, Justice Bryan was named “Judge of the Year” by the Family Law Section of the Alabama State Bar.

Justice Bryan is a member of the Alabama Bar Association, where he serves as a member of the Environmental Law and Appellate Practice Sections, and he has served as vice chairman of the Quality of Life Committee. He is also a member of the Montgomery County Bar Association. He has been admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court and the United States Courts of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and the District of Columbia.

Justice Bryan is married to the former Pamela Mizzell from Tuscaloosa, and they have two children, a daughter, Thomason, and a son, Tucker. The Bryan family attends Montgomery’s First Baptist Church. Justice Bryan is a Deacon there and sings in the sanctuary choir. He also teaches a young-married-adult Sunday School class.

http://judicial.alabama.gov/supreme.cfm