Plantiff John Howard talking. Charter city can limit write-ins. We don't want a minority mayor (under 50% +1). Never was the intent of the framers of the Charter. Charter is the constitution of the city, state supreme court has upheld that view.
Can everybody say "next stop: appeals court" or "it's time to fire the City Clerk?"
New election? Prevent certification? Only the TRO issue? Joking about misprouncing judge's name. Asking the court to go beyond just the TRO issue or abuse of discretion and address the election problem.
Much talking over by idiot reports... Howard saying the court has the authority, says a decision must be made. Court still concerned they may not have authority, may not be able to do this at this juncture. Saying challenge may only come after certification, asking for writ of mandamus because there was a violation of the Charter, asking for a new proper election with the two legal primary "winners"... City's defense is only "document of latches" and says the city caused the problem. Latches (?) says if you sit on your rights, you've given them up. Howard is arguing he did not know what the charter said and the City can't claim latches because they were the cause of the problem, citizens are not on notice, the city officials are on notice and did nothing to comply with the charter. Talking about case the City claims supports latches... case from Hawaii... says this was a different multi-year circumstance.
Question... who would be new mayor until a new election. Says current mayor would stay as per charter. Female judge asking about muni. election code and waiting until after certification. Howard says the court would not be ignoring that code because he's asking for writ because the election itself was invalid.
Says election code itself is a defence against latches claim. Howard arguing the court needs to act because time of the the essence.
Judge asking when voters knew there would be a write-in. Five weeks. Absentee voting began almost immediately after. Why wasn't this filed during that five weeks prior to the election. Is not knowing the charter a reason to be allowed to wait? Asking court to look at Southwest Voter Registration case for a discussion in the decision... it deals with latches. That case said the plantiff had to have known of his right to challenge the write-in process beforehand. Howard says the party doing the wrong should've been the party to protect the platiff's right.
Says if this is allowed to go, city officials will willfully ignore the charter and the city will again claim latches and get away with it when a citizen catches on to the illegality.
City's lawyer comes up now...