Dummett v. Bowen CA3

Filed 7/21/14 Dummett v. Bowen CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

JOHN ALBERT DUMMETT, JR., et al., C073763

Plaintiffs and Appellants, (Super. Ct. No. 342012800001091CUWMGDS) v.

DEBRA BOWEN, as Secretary of State, etc.,

Defendant and Respondent.

In Keyes v. Bowen (2010) 189 Cal.App.4th 647 (Keyes), this court held that the California Secretary of State “does not have a duty to investigate and determine whether a presidential candidate meets [the] eligibility requirements of the United States Constitution.” (Id. at p. 651-652.) Within two years of the Keyes decision, plaintiff John Albert Dummett, Jr., a write-in presidential candidate in the 2012 California Republican primary, and others (hereafter Dummett) commenced this mandamus proceeding, seeking a writ of mandate to require defendant Debra Bowen, as Secretary of State, to “require all candidates for the office of President of the United States provide sufficient proof of

1

eligibility prior to approving their names for the ballot” and to enjoin Bowen “from placing the names of candidates who have failed to so prove their eligibility on the 2012 California Presidential primary election ballot.” Like the plaintiffs in Keyes, Dummett based his petition on the assertion that Bowen has a duty to “verify the eligibility of Presidential candidates.” Dummett also asserted in his petition that Elections Code section 6901 is unconstitutional to the extent it requires the Secretary of State to place presidential candidates’ names on the ballot without vetting their qualifications.1 The trial court sustained Bowen’s demurrer without leave to amend. Because Dummett has shown no error in that ruling, we affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In March 2012, Dummett filed a petition for writ of mandate “challeng[ing] the failure of . . . Bowen . . . to verify that all candidates for the office of President of the United States seeking to be placed on the California Presidential primary ballot are eligible for that office under the U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5.”2 He further asserted that “the language of California Elections Code [section] 6901, compelling the Secretary of State to place any candidate nominated by a political party on