Statement by Mike Voeltz, Florida “Obama” Ballot Challenge Plaintiff
Posted by By GeorgeM at 8 December, at 18 : 07 PM Print
(note: this is a re-issue of previous email with corrupted link)
US Code 3 S. 5 stipulates that all “election contests,” properly made, be adjudicated with finality prior to the 6th day before Elector voting day by the state where the challenge occurred. Until Florida rules definitively on this challenge of Obama’s eligibility, its Electors will not receive Section 2 status. If the Florida judiciary does not rule on the meaning of “natural born Citizen”, and whether Obama is one, it will break that law (US C. 3 s.5). I have filed a properly made contest, perfectly within the Florida statutes, have standing and a real case and controversy to appeal directly to the SCOTUS before Elector Voting day.
Mike Voeltz
Mike is Plaintiff in multiple Florida eligibility-related cases, represented by Larry Klayman. See our Florida ballot news page
Interviews and arranging donations: leklayman@gmail.com
I wish you luck on that one. As long as we have Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal etc..running around like he is a “Natural Born Citizen” There isn’t a snowballs chance of ever getting any court to rule on the Obama Status. This is why Republicans in Congress refuse to push the issue because they think they can just remain silent and the American people will be rendered helpless. They know they can’t get the Constitution changed or amended so they think they can win with silence. Until Rubio is pronounced inelligible the Obama trama will continue.
Melvin E. Holliday, 5 months ago
Up to us to break the silence.
Obama
Santorum
Hassan
Jindal
Rubio
Cruz
All ineligible.
GeorgeM, 5 months ago
My words exactly. A very serious program by people like you and I can grow to expose Rubio amd Jindal and thus expose Ovomit.
John B, 5 months ago
From Plaintiff Mike Voeltz:
The statute says that a judicial determination must be made— which includes appeals. Elector voting Day is JANUARY 13 (second Monday in January— so adjudication of the election contest must be made by Jan. 6, 2013) The Florida statutes specifically say that election contests are adjudicated in the courts of Fla., not some Committee or administrative tribunal. Since US Code 3 s. 5 requires a judgment BEFORE the electors can receive Section 2 status (seated in the electoral college), my case has perfect grounds for an IMMEDIATE appeal to the Fla. Supreme Court— and if not granted, to the SCOTUS— because Florida will be violating US Code 3 s. 5, and its electors should not be seated. It also says “FINAL DETERMINATION”, not “ANY DETERMINATION”.
This was the issue in Bush v. Gore also. The Supreme Court determined that the final adjudication of the election contest by the Fla. Supreme Court, that ALL of the votes should be recounted, left no time for a process to be implemented that guarenteed equal protection before the 6th day prior to Elector Voting Day— so the SCOTUS ended the counting in order to ensure that the Electors be seated. Therefore I have a very large precedent in my favor
US Code 3 S. 5:
“If any State shall have provided, by laws enacted prior to the
day fixed for the appointment of the electors, for its final
determination of any controversy or contest concerning the
appointment of all or any of the electors of such State, by
judicial or other methods or procedures, and such determination
shall have been made at least six days before the time fixed for
the meeting of the electors, such determination made pursuant to
such law so existing on said day, and made at least six days prior
to said time of meeting of the electors, shall be conclusive, and
shall govern in the counting of the electoral votes as provided in
the Constitution, and as hereinafter regulated, so far as the
ascertainment of the electors appointed by such State is concerned”.
They should be scared, because I am not joking.
GeorgeM, 5 months ago
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/key-dates.html
The 2012 Presidential Election
View results from the 2012 Presidential Election
Summary of Key Dates for the 2012 Presidential Election
June through October 2012
The Office of the Federal Register, on behalf of the Archivist of the United States, prepares Electoral College instructional materials for the Archivist to send to the governors of the 50 States and the mayor of the District of Columbia.
The materials include:
a letter from the Archivist—view a sample letter
detailed procedural instructions and a checklist outlining the State’s responsibilities
a timeline of key dates for the Electoral College
a pamphlet highlighting the Presidential Election provisions in the Constitution and Federal Law
Under the 23rd Amendment of the Constitution, the District of Columbia is allocated 3 electors and treated like a state for purposes of the Electoral College. For this reason, in the following discussion, the word “state” also refers to the District of Columbia and the word “governor” also refers to the Mayor of the District of Columbia.
November 6, 2012—Election Day
Registered voters cast their votes for President and Vice President. By doing so, they also help choose the electors who will represent their state in the Electoral College.
Mid-November through December 17, 2012
After the presidential election, the governor of your state prepares seven Certificates of Ascertainment. “As soon as practicable,” after the election results in your state are certified, the governor sends one of the Certificates of Ascertainment to the Archivist.
Certificates of Ascertainment should be sent to the Archivist no later than the meeting of the electors on December 17, 2012. However, federal law sets no penalty for missing the deadline.
The remaining six Certificates of Ascertainment are held for use at the meeting of the Electors on December 17, 2012.
December 11, 2012
States must make final decisions in any controversies over the appointment of their electors at least six days before the meeting of the Electors on December 17, 2012. This is so their electoral votes will be presumed valid when presented to Congress. The deadline for resolving any controversies is December 11, 2012.
Decisions by states’ courts are conclusive, if decided under laws enacted before Election Day, November 6, 2012.
December 17, 2012
The Electors meet in their state and vote for President and Vice President on separate ballots. The electors record their votes on six “Certificates of Vote,” which are paired with the six remaining Certificates of Ascertainment.
The electors sign, seal, and certify six sets of electoral votes. A set of electoral votes consists of one Certificate of Ascertainment and one Certificate of Vote. These are distributed immediately as follows:
one set to the President of the Senate (the Vice President) for the official count of the electoral votes on January 6, 2013;
two packages to the Secretary of State in the state where the electors met—one is an archival set that becomes part of the public record of the Secretary of State’s office and the other is a reserve set that is subject to the call of the President of the Senate to replace missing or incomplete electoral votes;
two packages to the Archivist—one is an archival set that becomes part of the permanent collection at the National Archives and Records Administration and the other is a reserve set that is subject to the call of the President of the Senate to replace missing or incomplete electoral votes; and
one set to the presiding judge in the district where the Electors met—this is also a reserve set that is subject to the call of the President of the Senate to replace missing or incomplete electoral votes.
December 26, 2012
The deadline for receipt of the electoral votes by the President of the Senate and the Archivist is December 26, 2012. States face no legal penalty for failure to comply.
If votes are lost or delayed, the Archivist may take extraordinary measures to retrieve duplicate originals.
On or Before January 3, 2013
The Archivist and/or representatives from the Office of the Federal Register meet with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House in late December or early January. This is, in part, a ceremonial occasion. Informal meetings may take place earlier.
January 6, 2013
The Congress meets in joint session to count the electoral votes on January 6, 2013. Congress may pass a law to change this date.
The Vice President, as President of the Senate, presides over the count and announces the results of the Electoral College vote. The President of the Senate then declares which persons, if any, have been elected President and Vice President of the United States.
If a State submits conflicting sets of electoral votes to Congress, the two Houses acting concurrently may accept or reject the votes. If they do not concur, the votes of the electors certified by the Governor of the State on the Certificate of Ascertainment would be counted in Congress.
If no Presidential candidate wins 270 or more electoral votes, a majority, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution provides for the House of Representatives to decide the Presidential election. If necessary the House would elect the President by majority vote, choosing from the three candidates who received the greatest number of electoral votes. The vote would be taken by state, with each state having one vote.
If no Vice Presidential candidate wins 270 or more electoral votes, a majority, the 12th Amendment provides for the Senate to elect the Vice President. If necessary, the Senate would elect the Vice President by majority vote, choosing from the two candidates who received the greatest number of electoral votes. The vote would be taken by state, with each Senator having one vote.
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.
January 20, 2013 at Noon—Inauguration Day
The President-elect takes the Oath of Office and becomes the President of the United States.
General Authority
The Archivist of the United States, as the head of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), is responsible for carrying out ministerial duties on behalf of the States and the Congress under 3 U.S.C. sections 6, 11, 12, and 13.
NARA is primarily responsible for coordinating the various stages of the electoral process by helping the States prepare and submit certificates that establish the appointment of electors and validate the electoral votes of each State.
The Archivist delegates operational duties to the Director of the Federal Register. The Federal Register Legal Staff ensures that electoral documents are transmitted to Congress, made available to the public, and preserved as part of our nation’s history.
The Office of the Federal Register Legal Staff reviews the electoral certificates for the required signatures, seals and other matters of form, as specified in federal law.
Only the Congress and the courts have the authority to rule on substantive legal issues.
Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
GeorgeM, 5 months ago
From Plaintiff Mike Voeltz
The Elector meeting is actually Dec. 17 (not the second Monday in Jan.— Congress does the ministerial duty of COUNTING the electoral votes on Jan 6. As of tomorrrow Fla. will be violating US Code 3 s. 5 (six days prior is 12/11), because it will have made no FINAL determination to my election contest. This is appealable to the SCOTUS immediately, and should be adjudicated prior to Jan. 6.
GeorgeM, 5 months ago
Since it is impossible for Florida to resolve the contest by the safe harbor date (today 12/11/2012) the electors will vote on Dec 17 and it will be up to Congress to decide if they wish to accept the votes. Similar to what happened in 2004. Since Florida has already certified the popular vote and sent the ascertainment to Congress, it hard to see how the SCOTUS will get involved.
William Rawle, 5 months ago
“Therefore I have a very large precedent in my favor” Mike Voeltz
Doesn’t this really mean that the SCOTUS would stop the legal proceeding after the safe harbor date?
Isn’t that what they did in Bush/Gore? Said that because the the recount cannot be done by the safe harbor date it would violate Florida law? In fact, couldn’t the defendants in your case cite Bush/Gore as grounds for dismissing your case?
William Rawle, 5 months ago
Comment from plaintiff Mike Voeltz:
It’s interesting that the OBOT uses the name of Willian Rawle— a known British loyalist from the early days of the Republic.
(Mike will have a statement for us Wednesday.)
GeorgeM, 5 months ago
For Mr. Voeltz some information about the original William Rawle.
He was born in 1759, his father died when he was about 2 years old. His mother remarried Samuel Shoemaker.
His stepfather was a loyalist and mayor of Philadelphia. In 1778 at his mother’s request William traveled with his stepfather to New York. There he began to study law. He went to England and studied law at the Middle Temple. He then went to Europe. In 1782 he began to plan on returning to America. He told his mother he was not worried about his return as “I have nothing to fear, as I have nothing to charge myself with. I have in no instance taken a decisive part on either side; unless that voyage to New York, which was the effect of filial duty should be urge a crime.”
He turned down the British governments offer of compensation for his stepfather’s property which had been confiscated in America, saying, “I do not think myself entitled by anything I have done, to ask for, and receive that allowance from the Government, which ought only to be extended to the loyalist, who has sacrificed his fortune in support of his Sovereign”
He traveled to Paris and on May 8th, 1782, received a passport handwritten by Benjamin Franklin and returned to the United States. On his return to the US, he took the Oath of Alliegance. In 1783, he passed the bar and began a law practice in Philadelphia. Rawle and Henderson, the law firm that William Rawle started is the oldest continous law firm in the United States.
In February, 1787 Rawle along with Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Paine founded “The Society for Political Inquires”. A society of prominent Philadelphians. Franklin was the president and Paine wrote the society’s by-laws. The society met twice a month at Franklin’s house. Rawle presented a paper on immigration at the April meeting. Other founding members included Robert and Governour Morris, James Wilson, George Clymer, Benjamin Rush and Trenche Cox. George Washington became a member shortly after the socierty formed. The society suspended its meetings in the summer of 1787 so that some members could attend the Constitutional Convention.
He turned down President Washington’s offer to become the first attorney general but later accepted the position of United States Attorney for Pennsylvania. A post he held for nine years.
“In 1825, William Rawle, a prominent lawyer who had been a member of the Pennsylvania Assembly that ratified the Bill of Rights, published an influential treatise” Justice Scalia in District of Columbia v. Heller (No. 07-290) 478 F. 3d 370
The treatise Justice Scalia is referring to is Rawle’s 1825 volume “A View of the Constitution of the United States”.
In that volume he states,
“Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity.”
William Rawle, 5 months ago
I think he knows most of that
GeorgeM, 5 months ago
Maybe he goes or maybe he doesn’t.
I suspect that had Mr. Rawle’s written that it takes two citizen parents to make a natural born citizen, Mr Voeltz would not characterise him as a “known British loyalist from the early days of the Republic.”
Back to the matter at hand, here is an interesting law review article about the safe harbor deadline
http://www.michiganlawreview.org/articles/an-unsafe-harbor-recounts-contests-and-the-electoral-college
“If a state does not reach a final determination by the safe harbor date, Congress has considerably greater latitude in deciding which slate of electoral votes to count.”
Florida certified the popular vote on November 20th and there is nothing to stop the December 17th EC vote.
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/2012-certificates/pdfs/ascertainment-florida.pdf
IANAL but I suspect Florida Courts do not have jursidiction anymore.
William Rawle, 5 months ago
It is now Dec 13. What is the status? What is the very next legal step? Anything?? Or does this just fizzle away with whimper?
old school guy osg, 5 months ago