Comments on: Rare Publicity for a State’s Loyalty Oath for Candidates http://www.ballot-access.org/2009/11/27/rare-publicity-for-a-states-loyalty-oath-for-candidates/ Sun, 21 Mar 2010 16:44:10 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Mark Seidenberg http://www.ballot-access.org/2009/11/27/rare-publicity-for-a-states-loyalty-oath-for-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-781331 Mark Seidenberg Sun, 29 Nov 2009 20:30:05 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/?p=9286#comment-781331 Richard, I will look at it again. Please provide me with the 1967 case. I remember my late friend William Shearer (AIP Parlimentarian)telling me in 2004 that the AIP required all members of the County Central Committee to take the long form loyality oath. The AIP did not get ballot quilified until 1968. The case you make reference to is from 1967. It is in the current Constitution of California Section 3, Article XX. Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party Richard,
I will look at it again. Please provide me with the 1967 case. I remember my late friend William Shearer (AIP Parlimentarian)telling me in 2004
that the AIP required all members of the County Central
Committee to take the long form loyality oath.

The AIP did not get ballot quilified until 1968. The case you make reference to is from 1967. It is in the
current Constitution of California Section 3, Article XX.

Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party

]]> By: Richard http://www.ballot-access.org/2009/11/27/rare-publicity-for-a-states-loyalty-oath-for-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-781325 Richard Sun, 29 Nov 2009 17:52:54 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/?p=9286#comment-781325 #3 is correct. The California loyalty oaths had already been struck down in 1967 by the California Supreme Court, but the legislature won't repeal them; except when it tried to repeal one of them, as the post says, Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed the repeal. He is not a champion of civil liberties. #3 is correct.

The California loyalty oaths had already been struck down in 1967 by the California Supreme Court, but the legislature won’t repeal them; except when it tried to repeal one of them, as the post says, Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed the repeal. He is not a champion of civil liberties.

]]> By: John Anthony La Pietra http://www.ballot-access.org/2009/11/27/rare-publicity-for-a-states-loyalty-oath-for-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-781324 John Anthony La Pietra Sun, 29 Nov 2009 16:59:58 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/?p=9286#comment-781324 I think Richard is talking, not about a case particularly and only addressing the California oath, but about a case in which the general principle of requiring such oaths of candidates was rejected. And his giving the date as 1974 leads me to suggest he means _Communist Party of Indiana v. Whitcomb_, 414 U.S. 441 (1974). I think Richard is talking, not about a case particularly and only addressing the California oath, but about a case in which the general principle of requiring such oaths of candidates was rejected. And his giving the date as 1974 leads me to suggest he means _Communist Party of Indiana v. Whitcomb_, 414 U.S. 441 (1974).

]]> By: Mark Seidenberg http://www.ballot-access.org/2009/11/27/rare-publicity-for-a-states-loyalty-oath-for-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-781310 Mark Seidenberg Sat, 28 Nov 2009 23:08:41 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/?p=9286#comment-781310 Richard you are incorrect. The U.S. Supreme Court did not "unanimously hold that California Constitution Section 3, Article XX" was unconstitutional in 1974 or at any other time. It is interesting to know that on July 2, 2009, when Charles Deemer (a California Notary Public) gave the long form oath as stated in Section 3, Article XX of the California Constitution to MS. C. Nightingale who is running for Governor of California in 2010, that she did not asseverate the "no exceptions" statement on her long form oath. What does Nightingale have to hide of her past, by not writing the "no exceptions" on her long form loyalty oath? Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party Richard you are incorrect. The U.S. Supreme Court did not “unanimously hold that California Constitution Section 3, Article XX” was unconstitutional in 1974 or at any other time.

It is interesting to know that on July 2, 2009, when Charles Deemer (a California Notary Public)
gave the long form oath as stated in Section 3,
Article XX of the California Constitution to MS.
C. Nightingale who is running for Governor of California in 2010, that she did not asseverate
the “no exceptions” statement on her long form
oath.

What does Nightingale have to hide of her past,
by not writing the “no exceptions” on her long form loyalty oath?

Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party

]]> By: Demo Rep http://www.ballot-access.org/2009/11/27/rare-publicity-for-a-states-loyalty-oath-for-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-781292 Demo Rep Sat, 28 Nov 2009 05:37:09 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/?p=9286#comment-781292 Per usual - SUE any MORON bureaucrats who attempt to enforce any unconstitutional laws -- BANKRUPT them as an example for the party hack MORONS in the State legislatures. Per usual – SUE any MORON bureaucrats who attempt to enforce any unconstitutional laws — BANKRUPT them as an example for the party hack MORONS in the State legislatures.

]]>