Michigan legislative action thread
Posted on 05/24/2014 8:44:45 PM PDT by smoothsailing
May 24, 2014
Michigan's secretary of State said it's too early to say whether she would appeal a judge's ruling Friday that placed Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) back on the Democratic primary ballot.
A decision by U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Leitman overturned rulings by the Michigan Secretary Ruth Johnson and the Wayne County Election Commission that prevented Conyers from getting on the August ballot because of a lack of valid petition signatures.
The judge noted that he hurried to file the injunction Friday to give all parties time to appeal, if necessary, to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals before the June 6 deadline to certify the ballot.
“It’s too early to comment," spokeswoman for the secretary of State Gisgie Gendreau told the Detroit Free Press.
"We’ve received the judge’s order, but will have to review it with our attorneys before we decide how to proceed. What I can tell you is that the secretary is sworn to uphold the law, and that’s what she has done in this case and will continue to do.”
Conyers primary opponent Rev. Horace Sheffield III, who first challenged the petition signatures, said attorneys were reviewing the order.
“What we’re going to do is let the attorneys look at it ..., but it doesn’t stop anything as far as our approach to the campaign. We’re moving forward," campaign manager Rick Jones told the Detroit News.
More than 600 petition signatures for Conyers had been deemed invalid by the county clerk, with whom the secretary of State agreed, because they were gathered by people who were not registered in Michigan, required by state law.
That left Conyers shy of the 1,000 petition signatures needed to qualify for the ballot.
But the judge ruled the law was likely unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds, asserting it was not narrowly tailored. The previously invalidated signatures would send Conyers's total above 1,000.
"Plaintiffs here have shown a substantial likelihood of success," he wrote, adding, "The State’s interest in combating election fraud is compelling, but the State may protect that interest through a less restrictive means."
Conyers's campaign chair Bert Johnson, a Michigan state senator, told The Hill on Friday, "We hope this is the end of it because it is the right and fair decision," but noted others have the right to appeal.
Overturned and then upheld.
You know the drill...
Am I surprised? No.
Judge Matt Leitman was nominated to the court by none other than barack hussien obamar.
Even a layman can read the law.
And the judge could have ruled correctly, and Conyers will STILL win.
Even as a write-in. ASSUMING Conyers' constituents can write.
And a big ASSumption that is.
So no upside, and plenty of tyranny going on.
Why the corrupt POS judge had to stick their snout into this I have NO idea.
The state should appeal if for no other reason, to establish what the law and the role of the SoS is in MI. I am sick to death of judges deciding they can just overturn every damn law they don’t like (especially votes of the public on things like “gay marriage” and immigration).
Oh Hell no! That be White folk law! We not be held back by no White man laws!
But - only republicans are subject to law -
I worked for Ross Perot when he ran for POTUS in NJ. Funny how the courts required the petitions to be properly bounded, header sheet and all signatures must be valid. Oh one more thing, better file it on time. When one of the Perot supporters complained, one judge reminded him that if you want to be in the big leagues, follow the rules. LOL!!!!
Wasn't getting an opponent thrown off the ballot the same way their hero BO got his start in politics?
The guy has been in congress for decades representing a district and can’t get local people to collect signatures? Talk about being out of touch.
conyers never had a problem obeying this law the last 24 times he ran for office.
This bank robber judge stealing representations needs to go to prison. He obviously is not interested in running the business of the country.
You really believe that? No one challenged him before; that’s not remotely the same as having obeyed the law.
This will turn into a race issue. Then it will snowball to the media
This is why I laugh my ass off at those people who lecture us that our vote still counts.
If anyone bothered to notice, the rule of Law is DEAD in this country and the voice of the People will be determined by the Ruling Class.
If the politicians and the judiciary refuse to follow the law and make up what the law is to benefit the Beast, why do people still cling to the silly notion that our votes will count and that we can somehow stop tyranny at the ballot box???
what i mean was he didn’t have a problem going through the motions and satisfying the law, until the law prevented him from being on the ballot. seems a tad hypocritical.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.