No.
IN THE
Supreme Court of the United States
Sam Sloan,
Petitioner
v.
Hearst Media Company
WMUR TV Station
Deborah Wasserman Schultz
Respondents-Defendants-Appellees
On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari
to the United States District Court
for the District of New Hampshire
Motion for a Stay Pending Filing and Disposition of a Petition for a Writ
of Certiorari
The Undersigned Petitioner Sam Sloan, a Candidate for President of the
United States, hereby moves for a stay and summary reversal of the decision
of the District Court of New Hampshire which denied a motion requiring
Hearst Media Company and the TV Stations owned by Hearst Media Company to
carry paid advertisements advocating and supporting Sam Sloan as a
candidate for President of the United States.
Petitioner Sam Sloan was a candidate for election as President of the
United States on the Primary Ballot in the New Hampshire Primary. Prior to
that, Petitioner had been a participant in the Iowa Caucuses for the State
of Iowa.
Petitioner approached the TV Stations in Des Moines Iowa and in Manchester
New Hampshire asking them to broadcast paid ads advocating and supporting
Sam Sloan as a Democratic Party candidate for President of the United
States.
Coincidentally, both the principal TV Station in Des Moines Iowa and the
principal TV Station in Manchester NH were owned by the same company,
Hearst Media Company.
Both TV stations refused to carry the paid ads saying that in their
determination Sam Sloan was not a bona fide candidate for President of the
United States.
It became obvious that only two Democratic Party candidates were allowed to
have their ads broadcast on these TV stations. They were Hillary Clinton
and Bernie Sanders, the last one not even being a member of the Democratic
Party.
There were more than twenty other Democratic Party candidates on the New
Hampshire Primary Ballot. None of them were able to get their ads broadcast
on TV either.
Nowadays the two major party candidates are spending more than one hundred
million dollars each running ads for president. It has become impossible
for anybody to run for president effectively without broadcasting TV ads.
Thus, by refusing to carry the ads for Sam Sloan or any other Democratic
Party Candidate, they are saying that Sam Sloan is not allowed to run and
his supporters are not to be given the opportunity to vote for him.
Sam Sloan filed suit in the District Court of New Hampshire seeking a
temporary restraining order and an injunction. This was denied and the
complaint was dismissed.
Sam Sloan then appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the First
Circuit. This appeal was denied by the First Circuit Court of Appeals on
October 28, 2016.
Deborah Wasserman Schultz was named as a defendant primarily because it was
her decision as Chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee only to
allow two candidates into the debates, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders.
Thus, the more than twenty other active Democratic Party candidates were
not being allowed to debate or to run.
The situation now is both of the major party candidates are disliked by the
general public and the voters are crying for an alternative but due to the
actions of the above named Defendants – Respondents, nobody else can
effectively run.
This is an emergency situation because the election will be held on
Tuesday, November 8, 2016. If this court will issue a stay ordering in the
remaining few hours available there will still be time for Sam Sloan and
perhaps other candidates to mount a TV campaign and get elected President
of the United States.
WHEREFORE, for all of the reasons set for above, an emergency stay and
injunction should be ordered by this court requiring the TV stations to
carry the paid ads at the standard rates.
noon8window.pdf (36 Bytes)