Robert Bernhoft will argue on behalf of Chuck Baldwin, in the California case over who should be listed on the ballot as the presidential nominee of the American Independent Party. Bernhoft is the senior partner at the Bernhoft law firm. That firm last month won Ralph Nader’s ballot access case against Arizona in the 9th circuit. The firm also gathered publicity earlier in the year, when it saved movie actor Wesley Snipes from a severe criminal penalty in a case prosecuted by the Internal Revenue Service.
The hearing will be August 26, at 9:00 am, in Sacramento Superior Court, 720 9th St. in downtown Sacramento. The case is King v Bowen.
Actually Mr. Bernhoft will be arguing for who holds the true leadership of the American Independent Party, and which of two conventions that were held will be validated. Of course keeping Chuck Baldwin on the ballot is important, but the ramnifications of this ruling will affect both the AIP and CP for years to come.
This will have long term effect on the party, well beyond just who will be on the party ticket this November. The opposition wishes to disaffiliate the American Independent Party from the Constitution Party and make it part of the “weak and beggardly”, “threadbare and makeshift” organization of Alan Keyes.
So alot is at stake for the future of the party, and I am very glad that a superb lawyer like Robert Bernhoft is joining with lawyer “par excellence” Robert Barnes in defending the overwhelming majority of AIP membership, officers and faithful, from a malicious, putsche attempt by a mere handful of disgruntled malcontents.
The Constitution Party should have it’s own ballot line in California, instead of being like the Greens, which have different ballot lines in various states. Is Baldwin’s race finished if he doesn’t get on the ballot in California?
The American Independent Party has been the California affiliate of the CP since the beginning, which was actually around 1990, although the first Presidential election that the party participated in was 1992. Howard Phillips has acknowledged that there would be no US Taxpayers Party (now the Constitution Party) without the participation of the California AIP. Since 1992 the California AIP has not been any more a separate party than any other CP state affiliate.
It amazes me that some people are so mesmerized by the name difference, the reasons for which has been explained on innumerable occasions.
Of course, now it is even more confusing for some due to the actions of the hijackers, Noonan, Seidenberg and Robinson. We are very confident of prevailing Tuesday, but even if the courts don’t give us back our party, you can be assured that the members of the American Independent Party will take it back over the next two years.
Doesn’t the California Constitution require that Don Grundmann’s name be placed on the general election ballot as the presidential candidate of the AIP?
Similar problems going on with the Reform Party of California [Reform Party USA affiliate]! I do not expect the Democan/ Republicrat court system, which is a policial entity in of itself, to do any thing but keep the dust down………..