Abdul Hassan (lawyer)

Last updated

Abdul Hassan
Born1974 (age 4950)
NationalityAmerican
Occupationlawyer

Abdul Karim Hassan (born 1974) is a Guyanese-born American labor lawyer in Queens. He is notable primarily for pursuing the right of a naturalized citizen to run for, and for himself declaring he will run for, president of the United States.

Contents

In 2012, he filed several lawsuits claiming that the natural-born-citizen clause violated the 5th and 14th Amendments, arguing it was a form of discrimination based on national origin. [1] The argument that the 5th Amendment implicitly repealed the natural-born citizen requirement for the U.S. presidency has previously been advanced in a 2006 law review article by Paul A. Clark. [2]

Political views

He thought that the national debt and budget deficit is the biggest threat to the United States. However, he said "because the national debt and deficit are so large it is impossible to solve the deficit and debt problem with spending cuts and/or tax increases without destroying our way of life. The significant tax increases or spending cuts needed to solve the debt problem would have such a huge negative impact on our standard of living that any politician voting for such measures would be voted out of office." [3]

Under his plan, all budget deficits will be funded by bonds purchased by the Federal Reserve Bank. He said "We will no longer sell bonds to other countries or to Wall Street. If the Federal Reserve holds the bonds the interest paid on those bonds will come back to the United States Treasury instead of going to foreign countries and entities that would otherwise hold the debt."

Presidential candidacy

On July 5, 2011, presidential candidate Abdul K. Hassan asked the United States Federal Election Committee to issue a ruling as to his rights and obligations under the various federal election laws including the Federal Election Campaign Act. After an open meeting on September 1, 2011, during which the issues were intensely deliberated, the FEC unanimously voted (6-0) the next day. The FEC ruled that he can run for president and can solicit and receive contributions. The FEC also ruled that he is covered by FECA and is required to comply with the record-keeping, contribution and expenditure requirements of the FECA but that he is not eligible to receive matching funds. [4] In addition to seeking a ruling from the Federal Elections Commission, presidential candidate Abdul K. Hassan has asked the election authorities in several states for a ruling on whether he would be allowed presidential ballot access as a naturalized citizen. The rulings were sought from the state authorities because even though the presidency is a federal office, ballot access in presidential elections is generally controlled by the states.

He filed several lawsuits claiming that the natural-born-citizen clause violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. [5]

Related Research Articles

Lyndon LaRouche's United States presidential campaigns were a controversial staple of American politics between 1976 and 2004. LaRouche ran for president on eight consecutive occasions, a record for any candidate, and tied Harold Stassen's record as a perennial candidate. LaRouche ran for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States seven times, beginning in 1980.

Federal Election Commission v. Akins, 524 U.S. 11 (1998), was a United States Supreme Court case deciding that an individual could sue for a violation of a federal law pursuant to a statute enacted by the U.S. Congress which created a general right to access certain information.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">José A. Cabranes</span> Puerto Rican judge (born 1940)

José Alberto Cabranes is an American lawyer who serves as a senior United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and a former presiding judge of the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review ("FISCR"). Formerly a practicing lawyer, government official, and law teacher, he was the first Puerto Rican appointed to a federal judgeship in the continental United States (1979).

Harris L Hartz is an American jurist and lawyer who serves as a federal judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2005 term per curiam opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States</span>

The Supreme Court of the United States handed down sixteen per curiam opinions during its 2005 term, which lasted from October 3, 2005, until October 1, 2006.

Status as a natural-born citizen of the United States is one of the eligibility requirements established in the United States Constitution for holding the office of president or vice president. This requirement was intended to protect the nation from foreign influence.

Dennis G. Jacobs is a senior United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Paul V. Niemeyer</span> American judge (born 1941)

Paul Victor Niemeyer is a United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and a former United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland.

Voting rights of United States citizens who live in Puerto Rico, like the voting rights of residents of other United States territories, differ from those of United States citizens in each of the fifty states and the District of Columbia. Residents of Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories do not have voting representation in the United States Congress, and are not entitled to electoral votes for president. The United States Constitution grants congressional voting representation to U.S. states, which Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories are not, specifying that members of Congress shall be elected by direct popular vote and that the president and the vice president shall be elected by electors chosen by the states.

Stanley Marcus is a senior United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and a former United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Adalberto Jordan</span> American judge (born 1961)

Adalberto Jose Jordan is an American lawyer who serves as a United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. He is also an adjunct professor at the University of Miami School of Law, his alma mater, and at Florida International University's College of Law. In February 2016, The New York Times identified Jordan as a potential Supreme Court nominee to replace Justice Antonin Scalia. In early March, Jordan removed himself from consideration.

Williams v. Rhodes, 393 U.S. 23 (1968), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that Ohio had violated the equal protection rights under the Fourteenth Amendment of two political parties by refusing to print their candidates' names on the ballot.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stephanos Bibas</span> American judge (born 1969)

Stephanos Bibas is an American lawyer and jurist who serves as a circuit judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Before his appointment to the bench, Bibas was a professor of law and criminology at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, where he also served as director of its Supreme Court clinic.

Citizens for Equal Protection v. Bruning, 455 F.3d 859, was a federal lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska and decided on appeal by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. It challenged the federal constitutionality of Nebraska Initiative Measure 416, a 2000 ballot initiative that amended the Nebraska Constitution to prohibit the recognition of same-sex marriages, civil unions, and other same-sex relationships.

Numerous lawsuits and ballot challenges, based on conspiracy theories related to Barack Obama's eligibility for the United States presidency, were filed following his first election in 2008 and over the course of his two terms as president. These actions sought to have Obama disqualified from running for, or being confirmed for, the Presidency of the United States, to declare his actions in office to be null and void, or to compel him to release additional documentation related to his U.S. citizenship.

<i>Woollard v. Gallagher</i> Civil lawsuit

Woollard v. Sheridan, 863 F. Supp. 2d 462, reversed sub. nom., Woollard v Gallagher, 712 F.3d 865, was a civil lawsuit brought on behalf of Raymond Woollard, a resident of the State of Maryland, by the Second Amendment Foundation against Terrence Sheridan, Secretary of the Maryland State Police, and members of the Maryland Handgun Permit Review Board. Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants' refusal to grant a concealed carry permit renewal to Mr. Woollard on the basis that he "...ha[d] not demonstrated a good and substantial reason to wear, carry or transport a handgun as a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger in the State of Maryland" was a violation of Mr. Woollard's rights under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments, and therefore unconstitutional. The trial court found in favor of Mr. Woollard, However, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the trial court and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review that decision.

McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, 572 U.S. 185 (2014), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court on campaign finance. The decision was partially overruled with respect to aggregate base limits concerning two years election cycles which is located under Title 2 U.S.C. Ch. 14 Sub Ch. 1 Section 441a (a)(3)(B) which concerns aggregate limits on expenditures within; The [[Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. The cited section listed above, is the exact place in the Unites States Election Code which imposed a limit on contributions an individual can make over a two-year period to all national party and federal candidate committees, which the Court held is [un]constitutional. See Buckley v. Valeo 424 U.S. 1 at 424 under footnote 21 (1976.) now overruled at McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission 572 US. at 424 (2014) under Syllabus part (c) (3).

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. Trump was a case brought before the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The plaintiffs, watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), hotel and restaurant owner Eric Goode, an association of restaurants known as ROC United, and an Embassy Row hotel event booker named Jill Phaneuf alleged that the defendant, President Donald Trump, was in violation of the Foreign Emoluments Clause, a constitutional provision that bars the president or any other federal official from taking gifts or payments from foreign governments. CREW filed its complaint on January 23, 2017, shortly after Trump was inaugurated as president. An amended complaint, adding the hotel and restaurant industry plaintiffs, was filed on April 18, 2017. A second amended complaint was filed on May 10, 2017. CREW was represented by several prominent lawyers and legal scholars in the case.

<i>FEC v. National Conservative PAC</i> 1985 United States Supreme Court case

FEC v. National Conservative PAC, 470 U.S. 480 (1985), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States striking down expenditure prohibitions of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA), which regulates the fundraising and spending in political campaigns. The FECA is the primary law that places regulations on campaign financing by limiting the amount that may be contributed. The Act established that no independent political action committee may contribute more than $1,000 to any given presidential candidate in support of a campaign.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2024 Republican Party presidential primaries</span>

Presidential primaries and caucuses of the Republican Party took place within all 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and five U.S. territories between January 15, 2024, and June 4, 2024, ahead of the 2024 United States presidential election. These elections selected most of the 2,429 delegates to be sent to the Republican National Convention. Former president Donald Trump was nominated for president of the United States for a third consecutive election cycle.

References

  1. Palazzolo, Joe (September 4, 2012). "The Other Democratic Candidate". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved November 19, 2023.
  2. Paul A. Clark (2006). "Limiting the Presidency to Natural Born Citizens Violates Due Process, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1343 (2006)". UIC Law Review. 39 (4).
  3. "Issue Positions". Abdul K. Hassan, Esq. For President. Archived from the original on July 25, 2013. Retrieved March 27, 2013.
  4. "Advisory Opinion 2011-15" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on April 20, 2014. Retrieved March 27, 2013.
  5. "Legal Case". Abdul K. Hassan, Esq. For President. Archived from the original on October 1, 2012. Retrieved March 27, 2013.
  6. "ABDUL KARIM HASSAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. STATE OF MONTANA; LINDA McCULLOCH, Defendant" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Retrieved July 26, 2017.
  7. "Hassan v. McCulloch et al". Scribd.com. Retrieved July 26, 2017.
  8. "Abdul Hassan v. State of Iowa, et al". Justia.com. Retrieved July 26, 2017.
  9. "ABDUL KARIM HASSAN, Plaintiff, vs. THE STATE OF IOWA, and MATT SCHULTZ, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS IOWA SECRETARY OF STATE, Defendants". Scribd.com. Retrieved July 26, 2017.
  10. "Abdul Karim HASSAN, Plaintiff, v. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, Defendant". United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Retrieved July 25, 2017.
  11. "Abdul Karim HASSAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. THE STATE OF COLORADO; SCOTT GESSLER, in his official capacity as Secretary of State of the State of Colorado, Defendants-Appellees" (PDF). The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Retrieved July 25, 2017.
  12. "Abdul Karim Hassan v. The State of New Hampshire, et al" (PDF). United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire. Retrieved July 25, 2017.
  13. "ABDUL KARIM HASSAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants-Appellee" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Retrieved July 25, 2017.

Further reading