Yesterday, Commonwealth Court Judge Anne E. Covey rejected the nomination petition that former Easton City Council member Taiba Sultana filed for incumbent State Senator Lisa Boscola's seat. (You can see Judge Covey's Opinion below).
Objections to Sultana's nomination petition were filed by Patricia M. Hitzel (an Easton activist and regular attendee of Easton City Council, Celeste Dee, Patricia Bruno and Pamela A. Panto Wife of Easton Mayor Sal Panto. In the course of her very short political career, Sultana has managed to insult each of them. They were represented by Att'y Ray Lahoud, who grew up in Easton and was incensed by Sultana's divisive behavior as a member of Easton City Council. Sultana represented herself.
When a nomination petition is challenges, the Commonwealth Court directs the parties to meet in advance to review signatures and stipulate the status of as many as is possible. Sultana failed to respond to attempts to confer until the day before the hearing. Thus, the court had to recess the matter so the parties could discuss. When Judge Covey reconvened, she sat through 6 hours while 131 signatures were reviewed, of which 85 were clearly invalid.
At this point, the Court was prepared to hear legal argument, and Lahoud had a good one. On both her nomination petition as well as her statement of financial interests, Sultana lists her occupation as "self-employed" but fails to state exactly how she is self-employed. Relying on Supreme Court precedent, Judge Covey concluded that Sultana's nomination petition is fatally defective.
This Court agrees that by merely declaring that she is self-employed, without specifying the occupation in which she is self-employed, Candidate deprived electors of information the General Assembly and the Department of State deemed sufficiently material to appear at the top of each Nomination Petition page while electors apply their signatures. In Beyer, our Supreme Court proclaimed that “the statutory purpose behind the requirement [is] that Candidate supply for the benefit of electors his present occupation or profession.” Beyer, 115 A.3d at 841 (emphasis added). The effect of Candidate’s response is no different than if she had simply put employed. Accordingly, this Court concludes that Candidate’s failure to specify on the Nomination Petition the occupation in which she is self-employed had the potential to mislead electors and, thus, is a material defect.
Is this the end of the road for Sultana? Hardly. Expect to see her next year, declaring her candidacy for Easton Mayor.
Decision Rejecting Taiba Sultana's Nomination Petition for Pa State Senate by BernieOHare
16 comments:
Crazy, Chaotic, Criminal I really hope every time she runs for something in the Lehigh Valley Mr. Lahoud stops her.
I am bleeding making me the victor
TS just wasted mote taxpayer money and the courts time to stroke her ego.
She is on facebook this morning asking for donations to her act blue account, she is still running for office as if this never happened.
She was the perfect candidate. A complete idiot with no basic understanding of the legal system. Didn't Boscola allegedly sign her nomination papers two years ago?
I don't like this obnoxious miscreant. But I don't like the requirement for type of employment. It's the political equivalent of slut shaming. The law seems more about protecting other politicians than protecting voters. How is this requirement different from having to state one's religion or social affiliations? There's plenty of time for voters and media and opponents to ask candidates about employment and income sources in the course of a campaign. If they don't, it's their own fault.
Bye Byer Forever I hope. Lisa would have crushed her.
So much for the "Our Democracy" scam.
According to her most recent post, she plans to take this to the PA Supreme Court.
Someone should make an A.I. mashup of Sulktana as the Terminator saying "I'll be back."
I question why she is constantly allowed to do as she pleases with minimal consequences. Her forgery of Lisa Boscola's signature prior to this should preclude her from politics. She played the victim/ race card on that one also. She is seriously entitled and needs a reality check. If she does run for Mayor she will probably win because there a lot of deluded people out there.
She is fortunate to live in a country that allows her to file such an appeal. The Supreme Court set the precedent in the Beyer case, where a candidate listed his occupation as "lawyer." Even though he had graduated from law school and was awaiting bar exam results, he was not technically a lawyer and the Supreme Court found that to be deceptive. Sultana states she is self-employed but fails to state how. She likely is unemployed and has no income. Some might find this deceptive. I think it's a close question but a good issue to be resolved.
In fairness, I don't think there's any proof that she forged anyone's signature. The petition with that forged signature was circulated by her husband. English is not his first language, and he probably never realized that someone was having a joke at his expense. The person who is culpable is the person who forged it.
I don't see how requiring a candidate to declare occupation is tantamount to "slut-shaming" unless the candidate is, in fact, a slut. I don't see how the designation "self-employed" is in some way "slut-shaming." The purpose of requiring an occupation is to enable voters to know how a candidate earns her money. If she were employed by a big oil company or Big Pharma, should she be able to just say "employed"? No. Judge Covey makes that point. It is ok to be self-employed, just tell us how.
I find it amusing and completely on-character for her that it appears from reading the court opinion that she wouldn't even tell the judge how she actually makes a living.
Her signature was forged on Sultana's petition. https://www.wfmz.com/news/area/lehighvalley/northampton-county/easton-council-member-running-for-pa-house-seat-responds-to-forgery-accusations/article_25023978-cb9d-11ee-8e67-2f0a2f8b9213.html
Post a Comment