McHenry County Blog

Yesterday, I noted that the birth certificate issue had not gotten much coverage since MSNBC talk show host Chris Matthews brought it up.  He suggested President Barack Obama could easily quash the issue by sending him a copy of his birth certificate.

But McHenry County resident Sharon Meroni has been persistent in her quest to make it possible for citizens like herself to make certain that candidates are actually citizens.

We left off yesterday with the Illinois State Board of Elections have tossed out her objections and Mernoni having filed for administrative review in the circuit court in Springfield.

In the court case, the Illinois Attorney General argued, among other things, that Maroni was trying to amend election law and that the courtroom was not where that is done, not to mention that she did not point to any specific deficiency in the candidates’ petitions.

Meroni counselor Steve Boulton points out in his arguments that the state and national constitutions are quite clear as to the requirements to hold office. From that assumption, he concludes that Meroni had justification for her objections.

He argues that by dismissing objections for which no request was made, the Board exceeded its statutory authority.

He argues that Meroni was not provided due process because she had no way to provide evidence whether or not the candidates were citizens because she had not access to their birth certificates.

Boulton does suggest that the Board could have allowed the issuance subpoenas for birth certificates of candidates so challenged.

He further points out that constitutional questions cannot be answered by administrative agencies like the Illinois State Board of Elections. It takes a judge to make such a ruling.

“Strict scrutiny” is required for protecting “the fundamental right to vote,” Meroni’s lawyer argues. He points out that right is “a cornerstone of American democracy.”

Boulton argues that the impossibility of Meroni to determine whether or not candidates are citizens put an unconstitutional burden on her, especially because the electoral board “affirmatively refuses to make inquiry.”

Commenting on the adequacy of election officials relying only on the nominating petition to determine a person’s eligibility to hold public office, the brief says,

“Simply put, if a candidate has lied under oath in stating that he is a registered voter or otherwise engaged in falsehood in representing his citizenship, a basic requirement of candidacy under the Illinois Constitution, the nomination papers cannot in any way be considered ‘valid.’”

He calls the five day period allowed for objections a “substantial and unreasonable” barrier since it takes a court order to obtain a birth certificate if one is not related to the person. In addition, immigration and naturalization records are not subject to the Federal Freedom of Information Act. And the Illinois FOIA bars unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

So, a person wanting to challenge a candidate’s citizenship is effectively blocked from doing so in Illinois.

Meroni’s attorney asks the appellate court to give her a second shot before the State Board of Elections, declare the rule used to dismiss her objections invalid or declare the “legislative scheme employed by the State of Illinois has deprived her of her constitutional rights.”

You can read the whole brief here.

The last traction I saw for the birth certificate issue was when Chris Matthews asked why President Barack Obama didn’t just make his public.

It was raised locally by McHenry County resident Sharon Maroni when she challenged Sally Wiggins, Independent candidate for Judge, based on Wiggins’ not haven proven she was a citizen.

During a Woodstock hearing in which it appeared that Wiggins was fighting the request, Maroni dropped her election challenge after Wiggins showed her Harvard Hospital birth certificate.

But Maroni still has something going in Springfield.

Representing herself in the Circuit Court of Judge Peter Cavanagh, she sued the Illinois State Board of Elections for dismissing her election challenge to 32 candidates “without presentation of evidence” because “she failed to adequately identify her grounds for objection.”

Now attorney Steve Boulton has signed onto the case. He is with McCarthy Duffy in Chicago.

In his appellate court brief he notes that this is a de novo issue, meaning that it has not been considered before in Illinois. He points out that this state assumes someone is a citizen and a resident if a candidate files petitions and a Statement of Candidacy, that no further proof is required.

After the petition filing, it is up to objectors to disprove the statements made by a candidate.

“The candidate’s petitions are insufficient because they fail to demonstrate and/or provide documentation that the candidate meets the constitutional requirements for office,”

is what Maroni submitted to the State Board of Elections.

Attorney Boulton points out that those unrelated to another cannot obtain their birth certificates.

Seventeen of the candidates to whose candidacy Maroni filed objections asked for dismissal by the Elections Board. Another twelve filed appearances or didn’t, but no filed no motions.

In her response, Maroni pointed out,

“The objection refers to qualifications specifically mandated in the U.S. And Illinois Constitution to be eligible for office or to register to vote. These include citizenship, age, residency requirements and Public Disclosure Act.

“The objector has a fundamental interest and right to a ballot that has constitutionally qualified candidates.

“The objector has a right to know by what definition Illinois uses to define legally qualified on the statement of Candidacy for all positions.

“Without proof of citizenship, during the 5-day objection period, the electorate lacks sufficient information to judge the veracity of a candidate.

“That During the 5-day period, the absence of any public documents establishing constitutional qualifications available to her, deprives the Objector the opportunity to challenge contestants on the ballot based on evidence.

“The Statement of Candidacy requires the signatory to affirm ‘legally qualified’ to hold such office without clear definitions or public records proving affirmations of legally qualified. These subjective statements deny the voter the opportunity to assess the veracity of that claim…

“While evidence of eligibility exists in the public record for other qualifications required for legally qualified, it does not for citizenship.”

Maroni points out that vote registration rolls “do not verify citizenship.”

Her original suit claimed,

“Without public record, there is no remedy at law when a candidate lies on their application, Illinois and federal law is vague and ambiguous as to the meaning of ‘legally qualified to hold office.’ Law enforcement generally does not get involved. There is not way for a citizen to find redress.”

Reasoning that Maroni’s complaints did not “state fully the nature of the objections” or “state what relief is requested of the Electoral Board,” the Board, composed of half Republicans and half Democrats, dismissed all of Maroni’s complaints.

After she lost, she filed a request for administrative review by the Sangamon County Court.

Part 2 tomorrow. Go to it here.

Chris Matthews joined those conservatives who would like to see President Barack Obama’s real birth certificate.

I wonder what that’s all about.

Here’s the link to the video of the show on December 27, 2010. Below is what the Wall Street Journal ran in a post by James Taranto.

Birther Turnabout?

Three partisan commentators are calling on the state of Hawaii to release President Obama’s archival birth certificate, Mediaite reports. What makes this worthy of note is that all three are liberal Democrats: MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, the Chicago Tribune’s Clarence Page and Mother Jones’s David Corn.

On “Hardball” yesterday, host Matthews noted the report that new governor Neil Abercrombie was looking to “end this nonsense” (we also noted it). Matthews asked his two guests:

“I don’t understand why the governor doesn’t just say, ‘Snap it up, who’s ever over there in the department of records, send me a copy right now’? And why doesn’t the president just say, ‘Send me a copy right now?’

Why doesn’t [press secretary Robert] Gibbs and [White Obama aide David] Axelrod say, ‘Let’s just get this crappy story dead’?”

They resisted at first, but eventually Matthews brought them around:

Matthews: I’m just asking the obvious question. Why not–will there be any harm done by releasing the original document?

Page: No.

Corn: I will take the brave position of saying that if they can find it, they should put it out there, and then we can make even more fun of the birthers.

Page: I’ll take the brave position of saying, yes, put it out there, and the birthers are still not going to believe it. They’re going to say, “Well, that governor is part of the conspiracy, too, because he’s a Democrat.”

So we now have three or four liberal Democrats–the “Hardball” trio and possibly the Aloha governor–taking what had been a birtherian position in favor of releasing the archival certificate.

When Sharon Meroni challenged Sally Wiggin’s candidacy for Circuit Court Judge, Wiggin’s produced her birth certificate and the issue went away.