
Jennifer Gray
14:19 - 15:05
"the Division maintained that it lacked the authority to independently question a candidate's stated intent regarding future residency and argued against removing him from the ballot. The Division wrote in its briefing to the court that, quote, In his declaration of candidacy, Mr. Haffner certified to the Division that he would meet the residency requirement. However unlikely that may be in his case, the Division must treat him the same way it would treat any other qualified candidate who affirms an intention to meet the residency requirement by Election Day."
“the Division maintained that it lacked the authority to independently question a candidate's stated intent regarding future residency and argued against removing him from the ballot. The Division wrote in its briefing to the court that, quote, In his declaration of candidacy, Mr. Haffner certified to the Division that he would meet the residency requirement. However unlikely that may be in his case, the Division must treat him the same way it would treat any other qualified candidate who affirms an intention to meet the residency requirement by Election Day.”
Questions were raised about whether he could satisfy Alaska residency requirements by the time he would take office. Yet the Division maintained that it lacked the authority to independently question a candidate's stated intent regarding future residency and argued against removing him from the ballot. The Division wrote in its briefing to the court that, quote, In his declaration of candidacy, Mr. Haffner certified to the Division that he would meet the residency requirement. However unlikely that may be in his case, the Division must treat him the same way it would treat any other qualified candidate who affirms an intention to meet the residency requirement by Election Day. End quote.
Daniel J. Sullivan, denied a U.S. Senate primary ballot spot in Alaska, filed a court appeal today as state lawmakers held a joint hearing on the dispute
