Tag Archive for Standing

Standing

The quickest win is to make you irrelevant before you argue.

I see a similarity here.

“Standing.” That magical word judges love to toss around when they want to clear their dockets. If you don’t have skin in the game, you don’t get to play.

Now, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson wants to codify that same escape hatch into election challenges. According to one of her her shiny new proposals:

“The requirement that the challenger have personal knowledge that the challenged voter is ineligible is not satisfied when the challenger’s basis for their claim is third-hand information such as an online database, United States Postal Service information, or other information from a third-party such as another resident contacted during a house-to-house canvass.”

Translation? If you actually do the work—research the rolls, cross-check the addresses, talk to the neighbors—sorry, still not good enough.

As Patrice Johnson, founder of the Michigan Fair Elections Institute, put it:

“These rules handcuff the clerks and create a bureaucratic quagmire — all while extending the SOS’s overreach. While framed as ‘standardization,’ these rules create significant barriers to legitimate citizen oversight of voter rolls and petitions.”

In other words, the people who should have standing—citizens—are being told to sit down.

Read the rest here: The Midwesterner

You Betcha! (5)Nuh Uh.(0)

Timing Is Everything

The overturning of the Sixth Circuit Court may have positive impact on other Michigan imperatives.

Supreme_Court_US_2009The US Supreme Court decision today was probably an easy one.

In a 6-2 ruling. (see KG’s article for a link) the court upheld the ban enacted by Michigan voters in 2006; Proposal 2, the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative.  Race shall NOT be used in admission policies in our colleges and public institutions, or for purposes of employment or contracting through government. From the Detroit News

The ruling championed the right of the voters to set policy in writing their own state constitutions.

“Perhaps, when enacting policies as an exercise of democratic self-government, voters will determine that race-based preferences should be adopted. The constitutional validity of some of those choices regarding racial preferences is not at issue here,” Kennedy wrote. The decision here “is simply that the courts may not disempower the voters from choosing which path to follow.”

Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette, who appealed the appeals court ruling, hailed the justices decision.

That was a free promo, Bill. Lets start working on the next battle shall we? – JG

There is no doubt Michigan’s Attorney General carried this one across the finish line, but the argument was simple on a number of levels.

You Betcha! (8)Nuh Uh.(0)