Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Michigan Court of Appeals Agrees to Hear Recount Case
AG Bill Schuette ^ | 12/5/2016 | Bill Schuette

Posted on 12/05/2016 10:34:28 AM PST by usafa92

Just the link to AG Schuette's Twitter. Account. The tweet reads Michigan Court of Appeals, not the MI SC or the US Court of Appeals. Will monitor going forward. As news reports come in, we can perhaps keep this as the running thread.


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: agschuette; election; michigan; recount; schuette
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 next last
To: xzins

According to legal experts cited by the Detroit Free Press, the MI courts probably can’t stop the recount now that the Fed court has ordered it to go forward. Schuette and co. would likely need to appeal the fed court’s decision to the 6th Circuit.

http://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2016/12/05/experts-federal-judges-ruling-ties-hands-state-courts-recount/94985380/


41 posted on 12/05/2016 11:25:46 AM PST by wejustorderedbisque
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: damper99; Cboldt

Yes and No. You are correct in interpreting his ruling and this is probably headed to the US Court of Appeals. However, his ruling was to the State Board of Canvassers and technically does not bind the MI Court of Appeals or the MI Supreme Court. Some will interpret this as consistent with the Supremacy Clause others can interpret overreach by the Feds and MI can assert control of their election process. Cboldt? Any thoughts?


42 posted on 12/05/2016 11:27:06 AM PST by usafa92 (Trump 2016 - Destroying the GOPe while Making America Great Again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: newfreep

The recount in Wisconsin is going our way.

Dont think the feds are gonna order recount in PA.

#### em. and #### stein.


43 posted on 12/05/2016 11:29:27 AM PST by dp0622 (IThe only thing an upper crust conservative hates more than a liberal is a middle class conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Signalman

I’m not ruling out that the GOP is in on this. I saw the election as Trump v. DC not Trump v. DNC


44 posted on 12/05/2016 11:29:41 AM PST by wiseprince
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: usafa92

Big problem >> Liberal Democrat Judges — They will do everything they can to subvert the Electoral College.

Thank God we control the House of Representatives. We may need it.


45 posted on 12/05/2016 11:29:44 AM PST by Lonely Are The Brave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dp0622

The communist goal of the “recount” is NOT to find votes to win.

Their goal is to slow walk the recount so it’s NOT completed when Electoral College meets to cast their votes.

Since the three recounts will be ongoing, the EC votes for the three states CANNOT be cast for Trump.


46 posted on 12/05/2016 11:33:29 AM PST by newfreep ("If Lyin' Ted was an American citizen, he would be a traitor.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: usafa92
I do agree that his order reads "count until the recount is done, unless I personally order otherwise."

That said, his opinion is narrowly focused on the two day delay, and gives short shrift to the fundamental argument, which is whether or not Stein is entitled to a recount at all. IOW, the opinion assumes the conclusion, she is entitled to a recount.

When two courts butt heads, the outcome is never certain. Even though this Federal judge has a lousy hand, the feds have successfully stepped all over state sovereignty before, and will continue to do so.

Assume for the sake of argument that a MI state court says Stein is not entitled to a recount, period, because she can't win. If Stein doesn't like that, and wants a federal court to reverse it, she needs to take that issue to a federal court, not the "two day delay" issue.

47 posted on 12/05/2016 11:36:09 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: xzins
The decision by the Federal district judge wasn't as outlandish as it might seem on its face.

The Michigan AG (or someone else representing the state in that role) testified in the hearing, and said he could not guarantee that a recount started on Wednesday would be complete by December 13th when the Federal requirement for a certified electoral vote had to be met. So the judge basically said: "OK -- then start the count Monday (today) just to get a head start on it in case the State of Michigan authorizes the recount on its own."

My understanding is that the State of Michigan can still decide not to pursue the recount, in which case the Federal ruling is null and void and any "recount" started today is irrelevant.

Any legal input from Freepers here would be welcome.

48 posted on 12/05/2016 11:37:26 AM PST by Alberta's Child ("Yo, bartender -- Jobu needs a refill!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: xzins

“How can a MI court of appeals change that Fed ruling?”

MI court could order the recount shutdown, and then trigger a Constitutional crisis as the MI counties have orders from the MI court and the Fed court. I’d love to see the MI SC shove it in the face of the Fed court.

Nonetheless, as for as I can tell, however, the only issue before the Fed court for MI was that WAITING two days from Monday to Wednesday was “unconstitutional” and the Fed court ordered the recount to begin on Monday. Don’t think that court addressed any other issues, so MI court could order it shutdown on other grounds, namely the grounds specified by the MI AG and the Trump lawyers.


49 posted on 12/05/2016 11:41:15 AM PST by catnipman (Cat Nipman: Vote Republican in 2012 and only be called racist one more time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: newfreep
Since the three recounts will be ongoing, the EC votes for the three states CANNOT be cast for Trump.

You should probably go back through all of the threads on FreeRepublic related to these recounts and note how many times this myth has been debunked.

If it was that easy to nullify a state's electoral votes, we would have had 0 electoral votes cast in every presidential election for the last 200 years.

50 posted on 12/05/2016 11:42:14 AM PST by Alberta's Child ("Yo, bartender -- Jobu needs a refill!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Because the states are responsible for voting, not the fed.


51 posted on 12/05/2016 11:44:10 AM PST by mazda77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mazda77

Yeah, it drives me crazy that the Dems talk about federal courts and their role in this recount business. Nope. The states vote for the president. I see no role for the feds.


52 posted on 12/05/2016 11:45:39 AM PST by ClearCase_guy (Abortion is what slavery was: immoral but not illegal. Not yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: newfreep

Recount of certified electors will not stop them from voting in DC. All the House need do is accept the original certification.


53 posted on 12/05/2016 11:54:59 AM PST by arrogantsob (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: arrogantsob

Never forget we are dealing with Alinsky/Hellry communists who believe in their motto....”by whatever means necessary”


54 posted on 12/05/2016 11:58:00 AM PST by newfreep ("If Lyin' Ted was an American citizen, he would be a traitor.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: newfreep

This is the fundamental nature of the hegelian dialectic they love so much.


55 posted on 12/05/2016 12:00:25 PM PST by Secret Agent Man ( Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Other than civil rights violations (Black Panther baton sticks in Philly)


56 posted on 12/05/2016 12:03:14 PM PST by mazda77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: usafa92
There appear to be two issues here.

1. Whether the recount is authorized by MI law. (Here, our side is arguing that it's not because Stein is not "an aggrieved party on account of fraud or mistake", because her petition was not properly notarized, etc)

2. Whether the MI 2 day waiting period for the recount is constitutional.

I read the Goldsmith opinion, and he decided issue #2, said the 2 day waiting period was not constitutional as applied to this case.

But can someone explain to me why the fed court's decision on MI's 2-day waiting period law could override the MI courts' decision on issue #1? Goldsmith opinion said nothing about whether the MI law requiring an "aggrieved party on account of fraud or mistake" is constitutional.

So why can't the MI courts decide issue #1 in accordance with their law?
57 posted on 12/05/2016 12:21:08 PM PST by wejustorderedbisque
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newfreep

I don’t care who the opponents are. We have the power to stop it under the constitution. It doesn’t matter what any judge says. The last and best defense is the House. It will not accept any slate of electors that comes out of these recounts.


58 posted on 12/05/2016 12:29:17 PM PST by arrogantsob (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: newfreep

One cannot trust these leftwing Alinsky communists - they will stop at nothing to complete their coup d’etat.

You are correct! These Commies will stop at nothing to overturn this election... Joe McCarthy was right you know...


59 posted on 12/05/2016 1:03:33 PM PST by Davy Crocket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Signalman

Why doesn’t the GOP demand that NV be recounted (where Clinton won). There is evidence that fraud occurred there.””

A recount has been called for in Nevada—only 5 counties.

Go to thread #3501590 & read the information about the fraud that has already been uncovered-—deals with registered voters that SHOULD NOT be registered.

The hotbed of Dirty Harry Reid—hasn’t been registering voters correctly for years & years.


60 posted on 12/05/2016 1:05:30 PM PST by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson