Abdul Hassan (lawyer)

Abdul Hassan
Abdul Hassan
Born	1974 (age 49–50); Guyana
Nationality	American
Occupation	lawyer

Last updated February 24, 2024

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.

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arguing it was a form of discrimination based on national origin.^[1] The argument that the 5th Amendment implicitly repealed the natural-born citizen requirement for the U.S. presidency has previously been advanced in a 2006 law review article by Paul A. Clark.^[2]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.

Legal case of Abdul K. Hassan

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

On May 22, 2013, he lost in Hassan v. Montana & Linda McCulloch at the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The appellate court's opinion, though not published, affirmed the opinion by Senior judge Donald W. Molloy of the lower United States District Court for the District of Montana.^[6]^[7]
On November 21, 2012, he lost in Hassan v. Iowa & Matt Schultz at the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. The appellate court's opinion, though not published, affirmed the opinion by Senior judge Ronald Earl Longstaff of the lower United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.^[8]^[9]
On September 28, 2012, he lost in Hassan v. Federal Election Commission at the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The district judge Emmet G. Sullivan ruled that the court did not have jurisdiction over the suit and Hassan's appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit was denied.^[10]
On September 4, 2012, he lost in Hassan v. Colorado & Scott Gessler at the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Neil Gorsuch, then a circuit judge, wrote on behalf of a judicial panel that Mr. Hassan was constitutionally prohibited from assuming the presidency and is permitted to be excluded from the Colorado ballot.^[11]
On February 8, 2012, he lost in Hassan v. New Hampshire at the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire, which is under the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. Judge Joseph A. Diclerico Jr. ruled that because the Natural Born Citizen Clause had not been implicitly repealed by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, New Hampshire state laws requiring all presidential candidates to affirm that they are natural born citizens are constitutional.^[12]
On June 21, 2011, he lost in Hassan v. U.S.A. at the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The judicial panel, which consisted of Jon O. Newman, Joseph M. McLaughlin, and Debra Ann Livingston, ruled that Hassan "failed to allege with any specificity how the natural born citizen requirement has already injured him or is likely to injure him in the immediate future" and concluded that he "lacks standing".^[13]

Related Research Articles

The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 is the primary United States federal law regulating political campaign fundraising and spending. The law originally focused on creating limits for campaign spending on communication media, adding additional penalties to the criminal code for election law violations, and imposing disclosure requirements for federal political campaigns. The Act was signed into law by President Richard Nixon on February 7, 1972.

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.

United States v. X-Citement Video, Inc., 513 U.S. 64 (1994), was a federal criminal prosecution filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California in Los Angeles against X-Citement Video and its owner, Rubin Gottesman, on three charges of trafficking in child pornography, specifically videos featuring the underaged Traci Lords. In 1989, a federal judge found Gottesman guilty and later sentenced him to one year in jail and a $100,000 fine.

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).

Cort v. Ash, 422 U.S. 66 (1975), was a case in which Justice William J. Brennan writing for a unanimous United States Supreme Court articulated a four factor test for federal courts to apply when deciding whether the implication doctrine allows a cause of action to be inferred from a federal statute that does not clearly state a civil remedy.

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.

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.

Sully v. Drennan, 113 U.S. 287 (1885), was an appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for the Southern District of Iowa in the United States remanding to the state court a case which had been removed from the state into the circuit court.

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.

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.

Doe v. Reed, 561 U.S. 186 (2010), is a United States Supreme Court case which holds that the disclosure of signatures on a referendum does not violate the Petition Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

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.

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 held that Section 441 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, which imposed a limit on contributions an individual can make over a two-year period to all national party and federal candidate committees, is unconstitutional.

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.

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.

Presidential primaries and caucuses are being held to select delegates to the 2024 Republican National Convention to determine the party's nominee for president in the 2024 United States presidential election. The Republican primaries and caucuses have taken place or will take place in all 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and five U.S. territories between January and June 2024. The 2024 Republican National Convention is scheduled to be held in July at the Fiserv Forum in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

References

↑ Palazzolo, Joe (September 4, 2012). "The Other Democratic Candidate". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved November 19, 2023.
↑ 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).
↑ "Issue Positions". Abdul K. Hassan, Esq. For President. Archived from the original on July 25, 2013. Retrieved March 27, 2013.
↑ "Advisory Opinion 2011-15" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on April 20, 2014. Retrieved March 27, 2013.
↑ "Legal Case". Abdul K. Hassan, Esq. For President. Archived from the original on October 1, 2012. Retrieved March 27, 2013.
↑ "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.
↑ "Hassan v. McCulloch et al". Scribd.com. Retrieved July 26, 2017.
↑ "Abdul Hassan v. State of Iowa, et al". Justia.com. Retrieved July 26, 2017.
↑ "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.
↑ "Abdul Karim HASSAN, Plaintiff, v. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, Defendant". United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Retrieved July 25, 2017.
↑ "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.
↑ "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.
↑ "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.