[size=117]Quote:
Originally Posted by FreedomFirst
The letter by George Washington begins with, “We are either a United people, or we are not.â€
Printable View
[size=117]Quote:
Originally Posted by FreedomFirst
The letter by George Washington begins with, “We are either a United people, or we are not.â€
Shocker! Judge orders trial on eligibility issue
Arguments planned Jan. 11 for major Obama challenge
Trial set for Obama's birth certificate dispute!
Arguments planned Jan. 11 for challenge to eligibility
A California judge today tentatively scheduled a trial for Jan. 26, 2010, for a case that challenges Barack Obama's eligibility to be president based on questions over his qualifications under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.
If the case actually goes to arguments before U.S. District Judge David Carter, it will be the first time the merits of the dispute have been argued in open court, according to one of the attorneys working on the issue.
In a highly anticipated hearing today before Carter, several motions were heard, including a resolution to long-standing questions about whether attorney Orly Taitz properly served notice on the defendants, which she had.
In a second ruling, Carter ordered that attorney Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation can be added to the case to represent defendants Wiley Drake and Markham Robinson, who had been removed by an earlier court order. Drake, the vice presidential candidate for the American Independent Party, and Robinson, the party's chairman, were restored as plaintiffs.
But the judge did not immediately rule on Taitz' motion to be granted discovery – that is the right to see the president's still-concealed records. Nor did Carter rule immediately on a motion to dismiss the case, submitted by the U.S. government, following discussion over Taitz' challenge to the work of a magistrate in the case.
Carter ordered a hearing Oct. 5 on the motion to dismiss and ordered arguments submitted on the issue of discovery.
If the case survives that challenge, a pretrial hearing has been scheduled for Jan. 11 and the trial for two weeks later.
More to come...
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=109242
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=109242
Shocker! Judge orders trial on eligibility issue
Arguments planned Jan. 11 for major Obama challenge
By Jerome R. Corsi © 2009 WorldNetDaily
A California judge today tentatively scheduled a trial for Jan. 26, 2010, for a case that challenges Barack Obama's eligibility to be president based on questions over his qualifications under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.
But the judge did not immediately rule on Taitz' motion to be granted discovery – that is the right to see the president's still-concealed records. Nor did Carter rule immediately on a motion to dismiss the case, submitted by the U.S. government, following discussion over Taitz' challenge to the work of a magistrate in the case.
The judge did comment that if there are legitimate constitutional questions regarding Obama's eligibility, they need to be addressed and resolved.
Carter ordered a hearing Oct. 5 on the motion to dismiss and ordered arguments submitted on the issue of discovery.
If the case survives that challenge, a pretrial hearing has been scheduled for Jan. 11 and the trial for two weeks later.
__________________________________________________ _______________________
Justice delayed is justice denied.
My sincere apologies for wimping out here. I had to reread my own words.
http://www.alipac.us/ftopic-137238-days ... c-673.html
[size=117]Quote:
Originally Posted by MinutemanCDC_SC
The letter by George Washington begins with, “We are either a United people, or we are not.â€
I cannot read the rest of their letter to Judge Carter.Quote:
Originally Posted by [size=150
I suggest that you should not try to read it either.
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM124_b ... ssbrf.html
Below is a message from one of the people attending the hearing. It's encouraging:
The expedited trial has been set for Jan. 26, 2010, just 4 1/2 months from now!
I and many other concerned veterans and citizens attended the hearing today in Federal Court in Santa Ana in the lawsuit against Barack Obama to determine his eligibility to be President and Commander in Chief. About 150 people showed up, almost all in support of the lawsuit to demand that Obama release his birth certificate and other records that he has hidden from the American people.
Judge David Carter refused to hear Obama’s request for dismissal today, instead setting a hearing date for Oct. 5, since Obama’s attorneys had just filed the motion on Friday. He indicated there was almost no chance that this case would be dismissed. Obama is arguing this lawsuit was filed in the wrong court if you can believe that. I guess Obama would prefer a “kangaroo courtâ€
Wednesday, Sep. 09, 2009
Army captain files suit over Obama’s citizenship status; Orly Taitz representing soldier
Connie Rhodes says she or others shouldn't have to go to war until Obama's legitimacy is proven
By ALAN RIQUELMY - ariquelmy@ledger- enquirer.com
Comments (105)
An Army captain fighting deployment to Afghanistan has challenged the legitimacy of Barack Obama’s presidency in a federal complaint filed this month, and has employed attorney Orly Taitz — a national figure in the “birtherâ€
Have anyone seen the massive media coverage of the Judge Carter hearing today? No? It's because there is none. Crickets, nothing but crickets. Why is that? Is the issue of BO's eligibility so radioactive that even Fox won't cover it? Of course, as the case progresses and a hearing orders the release of records, the MSM will jump in as if they've been reporting it all along. Shame on these so called journalists and reporters!
[quote="TexasBorn"]Below is a message from one of the people attending the hearing. It's encouraging:
The expedited trial has been set for Jan. 26, 2010, just 4 1/2 months from now!
I and many other concerned veterans and citizens attended the hearing today in Federal Court in Santa Ana in the lawsuit against Barack Obama to determine his eligibility to be President and Commander in Chief. About 150 people showed up, almost all in support of the lawsuit to demand that Obama release his birth certificate and other records that he has hidden from the American people.
Judge David Carter refused to hear Obama’s request for dismissal today, instead setting a hearing date for Oct. 5, since Obama’s attorneys had just filed the motion on Friday. He indicated there was almost no chance that this case would be dismissed. Obama is arguing this lawsuit was filed in the wrong court if you can believe that. I guess Obama would prefer a “kangaroo courtâ€
I checked the online Orange County Register about an hour ago, and nothing there either. Really unusual.Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasBorn
Here's a tidbit finally surfacing...OC Register
Obama-birthplace lawsuit in O.C. plagued by infighting
September 8th, 2009, 1:20 pm · 120 Comments · posted by Martin Wisckol, Politics reporter
Updated at 3:55 p.m.
In the federal lawsuit claiming that Barack Obama cannot legitimately be president, today’s hearing in Santa Ana focused not on documents that allegedly prove he was Kenyan-born but on the conflicts of plaintiff’s attorney Orly Taitz.
Judge David O. Carter dismissed Taitz’s motion to have two of her clients removed from the case and also tossed her motion to have Magistrate Judge Arthur Nakazato removed from the case. Carter said there was no basis in Taitz’s complaint that Nakazato was biased against her in an earlier administrative ruling.
Additional, Carter told Taitz that she had no choice but to work with Gary Kreep, the attorney now representing the two clients Taitz wanted removed from the case. Taitz had said she would not work with Kreep because of past conflicts between the two, and because they viewed the case differently.
Carter set tentative dates for other pre-trial matters and said that if the case isn’t resolved before then, a trial will begin on Jan. 26.
While it was a rough patch for Taitz this morning, she has her supporters. About 100 backers were on hand in the Santa Ana federal courthouse’s ninth-floor corridor when she showed up a little after 8 a.m. They offered a round of applause as she made her way to Carter’s courtroom.
When Carter finally got to her suit at 11 a.m., he started by thanking her for finally get her complaint properly filed, saying the process “seems never ending.â€
Here's a tidbit finally surfacing...OC Register
Obama-birthplace lawsuit in O.C. plagued by infighting
September 8th, 2009, 1:20 pm · 120 Comments · posted by Martin Wisckol, Politics reporter
Updated at 3:55 p.m.
In the federal lawsuit claiming that Barack Obama cannot legitimately be president, today’s hearing in Santa Ana focused not on documents that allegedly prove he was Kenyan-born but on the conflicts of plaintiff’s attorney Orly Taitz.
Judge David O. Carter dismissed Taitz’s motion to have two of her clients removed from the case and also tossed her motion to have Magistrate Judge Arthur Nakazato removed from the case. Carter said there was no basis in Taitz’s complaint that Nakazato was biased against her in an earlier administrative ruling.
Additional, Carter told Taitz that she had no choice but to work with Gary Kreep, the attorney now representing the two clients Taitz wanted removed from the case. Taitz had said she would not work with Kreep because of past conflicts between the two, and because they viewed the case differently.
Carter set tentative dates for other pre-trial matters and said that if the case isn’t resolved before then, a trial will begin on Jan. 26.
While it was a rough patch for Taitz this morning, she has her supporters. About 100 backers were on hand in the Santa Ana federal courthouse’s ninth-floor corridor when she showed up a little after 8 a.m. They offered a round of applause as she made her way to Carter’s courtroom.
When Carter finally got to her suit at 11 a.m., he started by thanking her for finally get her complaint properly filed, saying the process “seems never ending.â€
I am afraid to hold out any hope here. Although I have heard rumors that the dems are not happy about how careless Obama has been with their true agenda. I heard if he fails because of the way he handled this he could push back the communist and socialist movements by decades. If these rumors are indeed true, it is possible that the REAL powers that be will allow this to move forward. Does anyone else find it coincidental that a judge finally agrees to hear the merits AFTER Van Jones has to leave in shame and the Chosen Ones numbers dropped under the 50% mark?
Cayla, you may very well be right. It could be there are no coincidences. I still believe in the end, the people will gain the upper hand. We are much more savvy than we've been given credit for. We are so much more vigilant now, it's hard to imagine another socialist usurper getting into office under the radar. In the end, the powers that be care about money. A restless and unhappy population are bad for business. We need to make sure that our capitalist economy isn't destroyed in the meantime. First order of business..stop the exodus of our manufacturing base and regrow it in this country!Quote:
Originally Posted by cayla99
"Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast,
for it is the number of a man: His number is 666." - Revelation 13:14
In Shi'a Is|am tradition, that end times world ruler is called the "twelfth Imam" or the "Mahdi".
IMHO, and mine alone, the "Mahdi" is the image to which Mr. Obama aspires.
This is coherent with:
Regardless of any such Is|amist aspirations, Mr. Obama is not acting like the leader of America and the free world. Apparently, he would be the leader of all "anti-Christians" and all "anti-Americans".
- his Luo tribe heritage from his father, who was a non-practicing Mus|im;
the Islamic indoctrination he received in grades one through four in Jakarta, Indonesia;
his adolescent quest to be a bad dude, which meant being a Black Mus|im;
the Islamic influence of his Pakistani college friends: Wahid Hamid, his roommate at Occidental College, Hassan Chandoo, with whom he visited Sindh province in Pakistan for three weeks in the summer of 1981, and Hal Siddiqi, with whom he shared an apartment on E. 94th St. in a drug-ridden slum, while they attended Columbia Univ.;
his 20 years under the Black Liberation Theology preaching of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who occasionally shared his pulpit with Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Is|am;
his first phone call as de facto President, made to Mahmoud Abbas, one of the founders of the PLO;
his first television interview as de facto President, given to Al Jazeera;
his deep genuflection and low bow to Saudi King Abdullah;
his commitment to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq; and
his apologies to America's foes, especially to Is|amist terrorists.
Here is another first-person account of what happened in Carter's courtroom:
http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009 ... pt-8-2009/
CARTER SAYS REPEATEDLY THE CASE WILL GO FORWARD
Reported in person by Vivian Rixen
(Sept. 8, 2009: Santa Ana, California) — In a case watched intensely throughout America, Federal District Judge David. O. Carter, of the Souther Division, held a Motion hearing for the case Pamela Barnett, et al., vs. Barack H. Obama, et al., pleaded by Attorney Orly Taitz, esq., and the U.S. Attorney General, CA District, respectively.
The hearing finally took place about 11 A.M., local time, due to a change in rooms, ordered by Judge Carter to accomodate the large numbers of visitors.
Carter appears to want the case to ‘play out’. He said that the American people are surrounded by rumors of their President and should not have to live with this… Additionally, the military who are risking their lives deserve to know they have a legitimate Commander-In-Chief. Carter repeated this about 3 times during the circa 60 minute hearing.
Judge Carter also went on to say that this case should not be dragged out for months or years and people deserve to know, to which the audience responded with rounds of applause.
Dr. Taitz attempted to have Lucas Daniel Smith heard by the judge, and have his testimony on record. Dr. Taitz flew him out for the hearing, and told the court that he was receiving death threats. In addition she metioned to the court that another person with information about the case was found dead. Judge Carter, however, who wanted to follow proper proceedures recommended his deposition be taken this week instead.
To this the U.S. Attorneys objected. To which Judge Carter responded, saying, “Why would you have a problem with his deposition taken while he’s in town, I would think you would like to know where you stand on this, to know what your dealing with…!â€
[quote="FreedomFirst"]Here is another first-person account of what happened in Carter's courtroom:
http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009 ... pt-8-2009/
CARTER SAYS REPEATEDLY THE CASE WILL GO FORWARD
Reported in person by Vivian Rixen
(Sept. 8, 2009: Santa Ana, California) — In a case watched intensely throughout America, Federal District Judge David. O. Carter, of the Souther Division, held a Motion hearing for the case Pamela Barnett, et al., vs. Barack H. Obama, et al., pleaded by Attorney Orly Taitz, esq., and the U.S. Attorney General, CA District, respectively.
The hearing finally took place about 11 A.M., local time, due to a change in rooms, ordered by Judge Carter to accomodate the large numbers of visitors.
Carter appears to want the case to ‘play out’. He said that the American people are surrounded by rumors of their President and should not have to live with this… Additionally, the military who are risking their lives deserve to know they have a legitimate Commander-In-Chief. Carter repeated this about 3 times during the circa 60 minute hearing.
Judge Carter also went on to say that this case should not be dragged out for months or years and people deserve to know, to which the audience responded with rounds of applause.
Dr. Taitz attempted to have Lucas Daniel Smith heard by the judge, and have his testimony on record. Dr. Taitz flew him out for the hearing, and told the court that he was receiving death threats. In addition she metioned to the court that another person with information about the case was found dead. Judge Carter, however, who wanted to follow proper proceedures recommended his deposition be taken this week instead.
To this the U.S. Attorneys objected. To which Judge Carter responded, saying, “Why would you have a problem with his deposition taken while he’s in town, I would think you would like to know where you stand on this, to know what your dealing with…!â€
http://khow.com/pages/boyles.html
Taitz is now serving supenas to Get ALL of O records released today!!!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by 93camaro
I didn't see where she was subpoenaing his records today. The only thing I found was a link to a youtube video from last April.
93, how can she do that? Where is the source of this. sorry, I may have missed it.Quote:
Originally Posted by 93camaro
She told Peter Boyles today that she was doing it today!
She told Peter Boyles today that she had discovery and was doing it today!
Here is the Interview!!
http://www.khow.com/podcast/fullshow_boyles.xml
if problems go here
http://www.khow.com/cc-common/podcast/s ... boyles.xml
Got to:
September 10, 2009 8:00am
Peter speaks with Orly Taitz, lawyer who is a leading figure in the "birther" movement.
Did ANYONE LISTEN to the Interview? 8O
Yes, I am listening now and you are correct! It appears that Judge Carter will have to issue a subpoena for release of the records because of course, the hospital WON'T release them without this.Quote:
Originally Posted by 93camaro
Ok minuteman, clarify please.
Can't you tell, he is speechless :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasBorn
Deborah (9 Sep 2009)
"EYE WITNESS REPORT: Obama Eligibility Case Santa Ana, CA 9/8/9"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whoa! What a day!!! I’m exhausted, but wanted to get this information out….so please forgive the inevitable “typosâ€
Quote:
Continue to hold this Judge up in prayer. Ask God to continue to shower him with God’s wisdom and insist into the truth, and the courage to render a righteous decision……cutting through all the cloak and dagger and wicked schemes of the Obama team of lawyers.
Will do!!!
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/
Tomorrow at 2pm hearing for Captain Connie Rhodes MD in GA
September 10th, 2009
I just got word from Ms. Sweeden, clerk for District Court Judge for the Middle District of GA. We were granted an emergency hearing for Captain Connie Rhodes, MD, flight surgeon, who is scheduled to be shipped to Iraq day after tomorrow on September the 12th. Capt Rhodes states that she is willing to go to Iraq, as long as she knows that the orders going down the chain of command are lawful orders. We asked this case to be certified as a class action case, as she represents a whole class of plaintiffs situated in similar position. The hearing will be tomorrow at 2pm in Columbus GA, Federal Building 1201 12th street. Judge Clay D. Land courtroom. Judge Land was gracious and a real Southern gentleman in that he waived the technical requirement of a signature of the local counsel as a contact.
I hope that members of the military and other patriots of this country will be in the courtroom to support Cpt. Rhodes MD.
I will be making my travel arrangements shortly.
_________________
Let's hope the momentum keeps up!Quote:
Originally Posted by grandmasmad
Happy 9-11 Folks. A total of eight years without a physical homeland attack by our enemies. Now all we have to do is deal with the domestic enemies within our own government.
On the Judge Carter side, we have this new article from The Post and Mail:
================
REFERRAL ORDER GIVES RISE TO SPECULATION THAT EXPEDITED DISCOVERY IS TO COMMENCE
by John Charlton, The Post & Email
http://tinyurl.com/mg5xrh
(Sept. 11, 2009) — Yesterday U.S. Federal District Judge David Carter (Central District of California, Southern Division) ordered the Amended Motion for expedited Rogatory Discovery, filed by Attorney Taitz in the action Captain Pamela Barnett et al. vs. Obama et al. referred to Magistrate Judge Arthur Nakazato. This order followed Carter’s denial of Taitz’ request to remove Judge Nakazato from his role overseeing admission of evidence to the case, which duty he has according to Federal Court rules of procedure. Judge Nakazato is now to review the first Kenyan Birth Certificate.
Attorney Taitz had submitted in July a Kenyan Birth Certificate (hereafter the Lavendar Document) to be authenticated by means of a mandamus to Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, to move her to formally request the Kenyan Government to authenticate the document. This motion was denied by Judge Nakazato, whereupon Taitz filed a motion refusing to proceed before him, and a subsequent amendment to the initial Rogatory motion, on Aug. 20th.
Attorney’s for Barack Hussein Obama, led by Mr. George S. Cardona, acting U.S. Attorney, almost immediately replied to Carter’s order, with an ex-parte Application (accompanied by a proposed order), requesting immediate halt to any discovery which might be granted by the Magistrate Judge.
In this Ex-parte Application, Cardona requests,
"an Order staying all discovery in this matter pending the Court’s ruling upon Defendent’s motion to Dismiss, currently set for hearing on October 5, 2009, with the exception of discovery which Plaintiffs can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Court, that they need in order to counter (this) said motion."
The substance of Cardona’s application is that it would violate procedures to allow any notable discovery, before Judge Carter considers the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, filed on Sept. 4, 2009 (editorialized by The Post & Email, on Wednesday).
At present it seems unclear, what the Defense in this case would fear from discovery resulting from what many Obama supporters have claimed is a forgery (based on a Bomford Birth Certificate, from South Australia, distributed by Bomford.net, an online genealogical site); since, if the Lavender Document is a forgery, discovery should confirm this. Contrariwise, if the discovery would result in showing that Obama was in fact born in Mombasa, as the document purports, it is not clear why the U.S. Attorney Generals would oppose the divulging of information which would confirm the crime of the usurpation of the highest office of the land, by Barack Obama.
RUMORS THAT CARTER HAS ORDERED EXPEDITED DISCOVERY ARE AMISS
This morning, Internet sites like Resistnet and Citizen Wells Blog are rife with rumors that Judge David Carter has granted expedited discovery in the action Barnett vs. Obama, in Santa Ana Federal Court.
The Post & Email can confirm from first hand sources, that these rumors were based on the Referral order Carter issued yesterday and the previous court instruction regarding preparation for discovery, which should take place before the hearing on October 5th. This seems coherent with Judge Carter’s previous public statements, that procedures will be followed in the main case; which procedures did not call for expedited discovery at this time. Thus, The Post & Email can confirm that no expedited discovery has been granted in the principle action. The current dispute and ex-parte Application regard only the so-called Lavendar Document. Whether Judge Natazako will also review the Lucas Document is unclear at this time.
(HJ - I corrected several misspellings in the article. I think John Charlton must be a Brit.)
From the mouth of Orly Taitz, she has been granted the go-ahead for expedited discovery. I listened to her interview on a Denver radio station and it was clear.Quote:
Originally Posted by HighlanderJuan
Folks, take a look at the article in the link below. Would like some opinions.
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/14583
This is what really worries me. Orly seems to be all over the place. I am afraid she might be only half listening. I appreciate the fact that she was able to get a case further than anyone has before, but I am afraid her lack of legal experience is going to result in this case not being heard at the end of the day. We have a judge WHO REALLY WANTS THIS CASE HEARD, however, her unorganized hap hazard style might be more than even this judge can permit.
I am not surprisedQuote:
Originally Posted by TexasBorn
And this pearl from Canada Free Press:
=================
The Mistake, The Evidence, Obama is NOT a constitutional president
The Theory is Now a Conspiracy And Facts Don’t Lie
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/14583
By JB Williams Thursday, September 10, 2009
Though we live in an era when all undesirable facts are often blindly labeled “conspiracy theoriesâ€
I also posted the article because the arguments seem quite credible: two certifications, one stating that Obama is legally eligibile, and the second one not mentioning eligibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasBorn
I had actually seen both certifications earlier, but had just attributed the differences to DNC screw-ups. Not very good investigative skills on my part. :(
So, my opinion, to answer your question, is that this identified 'anomaly' must now be pursued, and I hope it becomes part of a lawsuit.
Good stuff.
The longer format was filed with the Secretary of State in Hawaii, and that state's SOS was the source of the longer document back in January.
The DNC might have prepared two different formats so they could meet the statutory standards that differed among states for what the Nomination certification must say.
Here is what could solidify the claim that something irregular happened in 2008, however. If people reading this post filed requests to their own states' Secretary of State for the Election 2004 certifications, those could be reviewed to see if they were all longer (or not). If they were longer, and they all had the Constitutional eligibility language in a year when John Kerry and John Edwards were the candidates for Pres and VP, then you have a strong basis for asking WHY was 2008 handled differently?
As far as I know, only Hawaii had the longer form filed for this election and that was because of HRS 11-113 (Title 11, Section 113 of Hawaii Revised Statutes).
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurren ... 1-0113.HTM
Quote:
§11-113 Presidential ballots. (a) In presidential elections, the names of the candidates for president and vice president shall be used on the ballot in lieu of the names of the presidential electors, and the votes cast for president and vice president of each political party shall be counted for the presidential electors and alternates nominated by each political party.
(b) A "national party" as used in this section shall mean a party established and admitted to the ballot in at least one state other than Hawaii or one which is determined by the chief election officer to be making a bona fide effort to become a national party. If there is no national party or the national and state parties or factions in either the national or state party do not agree on the presidential and vice presidential candidates, the chief election officer may determine which candidates' names shall be placed on the ballot or may leave the candidates' names off the ballot completely.
(c) All candidates for President and Vice President of the United States shall be qualified for inclusion on the general election ballot under either of the following procedures:
(1) In the case of candidates of political parties which have been qualified to place candidates on the primary and general election ballots, the appropriate official of those parties shall file a sworn application with the chief election officer not later than 4:30 p.m. on the sixtieth day prior to the general election, which shall include:
(A) The name and address of each of the two candidates;
(B) A statement that each candidate is legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution;
(C) A statement that the candidates are the duly chosen candidates of both the state and the national party, giving the time, place, and manner of the selection.
(2) In the case of candidates of parties or groups not qualified to place candidates on the primary or general election ballots, the person desiring to place the names on the general election ballot shall file with the chief election officer not later than 4:30 p.m. on the sixtieth day prior to the general election:
(A) A sworn application which shall include the information required under paragraph (1)(A) and (B), and (C) where applicable;
(B) A petition which shall be upon the form prescribed and provided by the chief election officer containing the signatures of currently registered voters which constitute not less than one per cent of the votes cast in the State at the last presidential election. The petition shall contain the names of the candidates, a statement that the persons signing intend to support those candidates, the address of each signatory, the date of the signer's signature and other information as determined by the chief election officer.
Prior to being issued the petition form, the person desiring to place the names on the general election ballot shall submit a notarized statement from each candidate of that person's intent to be a candidate for President or Vice President of the United States on the general election ballot in the State of Hawaii. Such statements may be withdrawn by a prospective candidate for Vice President and an alternative candidate for Vice President be substituted anytime prior to the notification of qualification or disqualification provided in subsection (d). Any such substitutions shall be accompanied by a notice of substitution satisfying subparagraph (A), a statement of intent as required by this paragraph, and a letter by the candidate for President endorsing the substitute candidate for Vice President. Upon receipt of a notice of substitution and all other required documents, the substitute shall replace the original candidate for Vice President on the general election ballot. The petitions issued in the names of the original candidates will remain valid for the purposes of this section.
(d) Each applicant and the candidates named, shall be notified in writing of the applicant's or candidate's eligibility or disqualification for placement on the ballot not later than 4:30 p.m. on the tenth business day after filing. The chief election officer may extend the notification period up to an additional five business days, if the applicants and candidates are provided with notice of the extension and the reasons therefore.
(e) If the applicant, or any other party, individual, or group with a candidate on the presidential ballot, objects to the finding of eligibility or disqualification the person may, not later than 4:30 p.m. on the fifth day after the finding, file a request in writing with the chief election officer for a hearing on the question. A hearing shall be called not later than 4:30 p.m. on the tenth day after the receipt of the request and shall be conducted in accord with chapter 91. A decision shall be issued not later than 4:30 p.m. on the fifth day after the conclusion of the hearing. [L 1970, c 26, pt of §2; am L 1973, c 217, §1(ff); am L 1977, c 189, §1(8); am L 1983, c 34, §14; am L 1993, c 304, §6]