Federal Judge allows John Conyers on primary ballot

M

miles

Guest
We don't need no steenking election laws! This is sickening.
----------------------------------------------------

A federal judge put Michigan Rep. John Conyers, one of the longest-serving Democrats in Congress, on the primary ballot Friday hours after state election officials declared him ineligible.

Earlier Friday, Conyers lost his appeal to get on the August primary ballot after state officials found problems with his nominating petitions.

But hours later, Detroit federal Judge Matthew Leitman issued an injunction ordering that Conyers' name be placed on the ballot.

Conyers needed 1,000 petition signatures to get a spot in the Democratic primary. But many petitions were thrown out because the people who gathered names weren't registered voters or listed a wrong registration address. That left him more than 400 short.

But Leitman's injunction said a Michigan law that puts strict requirements on petition circulators is similar to an Ohio law that was struck down as unconstitutional by a federal appeals court in 2008.

Leitman said the free speech rights of Conyers and the circulators were harmed, an argument pressed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan.

There's evidence that the failure to comply with the law was a "result of good-faith mistakes and that (circulators) believed they were in compliance with the statute," the judge said.

Conyers, 85, told WXYZ-TV,"I'm trying not to smile openly much but this is very good news, and it's also good news for the process."

The first decision, from the Secretary of State's office, determined that Detroit-area officials were correct in keeping Conyers off the ballot, since he "failed to submit" a minimum of 1,000 signatures to qualify.

Wayne County officials had said there were problems with some people who collected signatures -- the circulators weren't registered to vote or had listed a wrong registration address.
Under Michigan law, that can spoil petitions.

Killing Conyers' career in such a way would be "pretty outrageous," his lawyer, John Pirich, said this week.

But an attorney for a Democratic challenger, the Rev. Horace Sheffield III, said Conyers for decades had no problem following the law.

"In essence, they played the game, lost and then complained that the rules were unfair," Eric Doster said, quoting a Virginia judge.

Conyers has spent 50 years in Congress and is the second most-senior member of the House, only to Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., who is already retiring.
 
quite an outrage, isn't it?

A long-term member of Congress getting on the ballot?

This Republican 'block the vote' initiative hasn't had much success,has it?
 
Do we have to wait for the judge to tell us if Conyers wins the election? :D
 
I thought that the myth of the Yellow Dog Democrat was just that.


But someone here is dedicated to proving that it is not a myth, but actually that there is such a thing as a "yellow matter custard dripping from a dead dogs eye" Democrat...
 
Guess who appointed this assclown a judge?

(Hint - if you answer correctly you are a racist).
 
Get this: The judge ruled that the requirement that signature gatherers be registered voters violates their #1A rights.
 
I wouldn't say that; half of me is always wanting to kick the other half's ass and vise versa...
 
Get this: The judge ruled that the requirement that signature gatherers be registered voters violates their #1A rights.

Multi-state voting should be just fine by that judge then.

Ishmael
 
What!?!?

Federal judges interpreting state election laws?

Say it ain't so.
 
oh no, the people paid to collect signatures for petitions might not be registered voters themselves. ahhhhhhhhhh and shit. democracy is ruined. ahhhhhhhh, again.

fucking retards.
 
"But an attorney for a Democratic challenger, the Rev. Horace Sheffield III, said Conyers for decades had no problem following the law."

So this was Republicans picking on the poor Democrat, how?
 
The man's 85. Send him to a VA hospital if he gets sick.
 
The man's 85. Send him to a VA hospital if he gets sick.

laugh. Nicely done.

He is a textbook case for why term limits are a good idea, and Committee Chairs, Speaker(ship? hoods?) and Leadership by being the last to die in a safe district are bad ideas.
 
Yet another episode of MOONIT - Miles' Obsession Over Negroes In Trouble.

M-O-O-N....that spells Miles.
 
We hold that Blackwell violated Nader's First Amendment rights when he enforced Ohio's registration and residency requirements against Nader's candidate-petition circulators. We are mindful that the distinction between legitimate ballot access regulations and improper restrictions on interactive political speech is not subject to a "litmus-paper test." Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460 U.S. 780, 789, 103 S.Ct. 1564, 75 L.Ed.2d 547 (1983). Instead, a particularized assessment of the restriction and the burden it imposes is required. In this case, as in Buckley, Nader's petition circulation activity constitutes core political speech, and any regulation of that speech is subject to exacting scrutiny. See Buckley, 525 U.S. at 192 n. 12, 119 S.Ct. 636; id. at 210-11, 119 S.Ct. 636 (Thomas, J., concurring) (applying strict scrutiny because registration requirement impacted core political speech). Because of the unusual posture of this case, the record and briefs do not contain the usual evidence and arguments about whether Ohio's law is narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling interest.[10] However, it is undisputable that Blackwell's conduct sharply limited Nader's ability to convey his message to Ohio voters and thereby curtailed Nader's core political speech. Under Blackwell's application of § 3503.06 to Nader's petitions, Nader could only use circulators who resided in Ohio and were properly registered to vote in Ohio. In requiring such from Nader, Blackwell violated Nader's right to use petition circulators who were not Ohio residents and registered Ohio voters. See also Nader v. Brewer, 531 F.3d 1028, 1036 (9th Cir.2008) (noting that Arizona's in-state residency requirement for circulators "excludes from eligibility all persons who support the candidate but who ... live outside the state of Arizona. Such a restriction creates a severe burden on ... speech, voting and associational rights.").

http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/23fjf9fpy/court-of-appeals-for-the-sixth-circuit/nader-v-blackwell/

Sweat, as well as money, is speech it seems.
 
Back
Top