The recount must not include would-be votes using the provisional ballot affidavit when the voter did not provide adequate ID within the 10 days they were given.
And in Wisconsin, I read that they're not even using the same machines.
Also in Wisconsin, some are by machine, some are by hand and I believe that's a no no.
Do we have a law case for the Supremes?
Original counts will stand and the state will certify if recount is incomplete.
Yes. He’s an Obama appointee.
BTW: This goes to the MI Supreme Court tomorrow or Wednesday, and it’s reported to be 5-2 republican. So they could end it all recounts then.
Where does a Federal Judge decide that we need to enter the realm of slanted politics in deciding State election cycles? If the fed gets involved, they should be non-biased and recount a proportional number of states that Hitlery (aka commie bitch) barely won?
I’m thinking, that, ^maybe^...given the results of Wisconsin Recount, AG Schuette wants to shove it in Hillary/Stein’s collective faces when they find EVEN MORE Trump votes.
This is bad news. Yesterday, the final margin was 10,700 votes. Now the margin is down to “less that 10,000” and that’s before the recount has even begun.
A.G. Bill Schuette should take it to the next higher court, which would be the Supreme Court and request an appeal and a temporary stay.
They can’t get a State Court to go along, so they go shopping for a friendly Federal Judge. I assume this can be appealed with an emergency Stay.
The MI Secretary of State site still has:
Trump, 2,279,543 47.50%
Clinton, 2,268,839 47.27%
Trump’s winning margin was 10,705. Not sure where CNN gets its bogus numbers.
“U.S. District Judge Mark Goldsmith has the ability to override state election law because ... “
because the states have been subsumed into a minor role of the central government based in Mordor on the Potomac. Central government can do almost anything it wants, free of the constraints of the 10th Amendment. If anyone doesn’t believe it, just ask a judge. Make that a federal judge, whose salary is paid by the central government.
The Federal Judge is relying on the Supremacy Clause. Dr. Stein cherry-picked well. According to his order, the Fed Judge ordered that the recount start “must continue until further order of this court.” (”In ordering the recount to begin at noon Monday, rather than Wednesday morning under the two-day waiting period the state planned to observe, Goldsmith ordered the recount, once started, “must continue until further order of this court.”) Essentially, he removed the matter from the state courts and the count has to continue until he orders it stopped - not likely - or, he is over-ruled by the 6th Circuit.
Judge Orders Michigan Recount to Begin at Noon Monday 58 comments
(Vanity) Michigan recount ordered by federal judge to start tomorrow!! 191 comments
Because he got his job because he was blackmailable
Now the Soros Godfather has requested this favor...
Emergency Order to all Trump voters: Load up, prepare for defcon 1.
Recount Colorado and Nevada....or, at least investigate the massive voter fraud.
I really hope Trump puts the FBI and justice department onto the case, an congress passes a national voter reform act requiring voter id and purging/reregistering of voters using reliable proof of citizenship.
Some estimates are that this is going to cost MI taxpayers $12 million.
There has already been one recount which was mandated because of Trump’s narrow victory margin.
This is the rotten fruit of the USSC agreeing to hear a nonjusticeable political question in the Bush v. Gore matter.
We will never have a decisive election again if this is allowed to continue. The appointment of Michigan's electors is a plenary power of the State Legislature.
It is a serious error to fight this in a Federal Court. That Court should be IGNORED, because it is attempting to interfere in a process outside of its competence and authority.
They should take the money from the US Fed judges’ pension fund.
The press will NEVER tell an honest story involving politics.
This decision amounts to circumventing a two day delay imposed by law, in starting the recount. If Trump wins his appeal in state court, there was two days of counting that are a waste. It Trump loses on appeal, the recount goes on "as planned," except for starting the recounting two days earlier.
As for the opinion itself, it conflates the "right to vote" (invented by courts) and a "right to recount."