Abdul Hassan v. State of Montana
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Abdul Karim Hassan, an attorney, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir.1990), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Hassan’s action because Hassan failed to advance a cognizable legal theory as to why Montana’s requirement that candidates sign an oath declaring that they are constitutionally eligible for the Presidency before being placed on the ballot violates the Constitution. See id. (dismissal for failure to state a claim can be “based on the lack of a cognizable legal theory”); see also Nat’l Ass’n of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife, 551 U.S. 644, 663 , 127 S.Ct. 2518 , 168 L.Ed.2d 467 (2007) (“[A] statute dealing with a narrow, precise, and specific subject is not submerged by a later enacted statute covering a more generalized spectrum.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); Branch v. Smith, 538 U.S. 254, 273 , 123 S.Ct. 1429 , 155 L.Ed.2d 407 (2003) (“An implied repeal will…