It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Recall Petition Against Ms Whitmer in Michigan

page: 2
48
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 06:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: HalWesten

I wonder, if the case moves upstream, if it might affect things like presidents diverting funds allocated to the military because of "emergencies."


Irrelevant and off-topic.




posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: HalWesten

Then why did you post about emergency powers? Do you think that, if this moves through the court system, it will have no other effects?

edit on 7/8/2020 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 06:57 PM
link   
Agreed, but it doesn't make sense since the last application for recall was approved in June. The petitions are still scheduled to be distributed July 29th.

This is the article from the Detroit News that has that info:


The Board of State Canvassers unanimously approved Monday the language and form of an Albion man's petition to recall Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.


I think there was some court action after that that delayed the release of the petitions.



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: HalWesten

Then why did you post about emergency powers? Do you think that, if this moves through the court system, it will have no other effects?


Why are you arguing with pretty much everyone here lately? Almost every thread you post in is to dispute what someone said. Someone else made a similar comment yesterday I think, it's concerning.

The recall and the lawsuit are about the Governor's emergency powers actions. Period.



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: HalWesten



Why are you arguing with pretty much everyone here lately?

Oh my gosh. I'm so sorry. I failed to realize that agreement is the only way to carry on a conversation.

Lately? I guess you're new here.


The recall and the lawsuit are about the Governor's emergency powers actions.
That's not exactly how court decisions work.

edit on 7/8/2020 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 07:28 PM
link   
No, lately you're being rather dickish. Are you feeling ok? I'm asking seriously. I'm not asking you to agree with anyone, I'm just wondering why your attitude sucks lately.

This case is absolutely about Michigan law. If another court decides to use the case law in the future that's their prerogative but a judgement in this case will not alter anything but Michigan law. I'm not sure why you're arguing that either.



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: HalWesten




No, lately you're being rather dickish.

I understand that some consider those who challenge them to be dicks. I've been called worse. Believe me. But you're new here.





This case is absolutely about Michigan law.
Do you think it won't move up the court system? No appeals?
edit on 7/8/2020 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 08:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: HalWesten




No, lately you're being rather dickish.

I understand that some consider those who challenge them to be dicks. I've been called worse. Believe me. But you're new here.


Stop it. I don't mind being challenged, I enjoy it at times but I'm talking about the way you're responding to others. And stop calling me new, I've been registered for a year but a lurker way beyond that.



This case is absolutely about Michigan law.



Do you think it won't move up the court system? No appeals?


The Michigan SC is the last stop unless it deals with federal law. In this case it does not.
edit on 8-7-2020 by HalWesten because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 08:11 PM
link   
a reply to: HalWesten

I enjoy it at times but I'm talking about the way you're responding to others.
That has not changed. But maybe your perception has if it is directed at you.
 




The Michigan SC is the last stop unless it deals with federal law. In this case it does not.

False.

The recent SCOTUS decision regarding faithless electors did not deal with federal law. For example.

edit on 7/8/2020 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 08:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: HalWesten

I enjoy it at times but I'm talking about the way you're responding to others.
That has not changed. But maybe your perception has if it is directed at you.
 




The Michigan SC is the last stop unless it deals with federal law. In this case it does not.

False.

The recent SCOTUS decision regarding faithless electors did not deal with federal law.


Sure it did, they are participants in a federal election.



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 08:22 PM
link   
a reply to: HalWesten

What federal law did it concern?



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 08:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: HalWesten

What federal law did it concern?


The election is federal, not state, even though the electors are designated/appointed by the states. As far as specifics go, I'm looking for the exact information but it's taking time. I will find it and reply tomorrow.



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: HalWesten



I will find it

No you won't.
Read the decision. It concerns only state laws and their validity.



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Geez.....this is about a petition drive in Michigan o strip emergency powers from the governor......
Recall Petition Against Ms Whitmer in Michigan

Not federal law, but the Lockdown and various EOs that has had...and continues to have... a devastating effect on the economy and citizens of Michigan.



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 11:07 PM
link   
I didn't like the way she tried to shove the road tax down our throats. And when Congress disapproved it she punished the people of the state. Same goes with this covid, she is a spoiled brat that lashes back at everyone if someone challenges her beliefs and political agenda. I think she is the worst governor Michigan ever had. I will sign that petition.

If she had been a he and he was a Republican governor, I would feel the same way. I base my opinion on the fact that the person is way too entitled and I blame her parents for allowing her to get that way.



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 11:16 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

The way she did that road tax stuck in my craw as well.

I wonder how that barber is doing????



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 11:32 PM
link   
a reply to: DontTreadOnMe




this is about a petition drive in Michigan o strip emergency powers from the governor.

A state law can be invalidated by petition? Not even an actual vote? Seems that's bound to end up in court.
edit on 7/8/2020 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 11:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage
I dunno about that.
The petition, if succesful, goes to the legislature for review.
After that, I am not sure.
I guess we'll have to wait and see.



posted on Jul, 8 2020 @ 11:53 PM
link   
a reply to: DontTreadOnMe

The leg would have to either modify existing emergency action law or make a new one specific the the circumstances (the Governor).

Either will result in lawsuits. Changing (removing or adding) existing powers doesn't happen without them.

edit on 7/9/2020 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2020 @ 08:24 AM
link   
Ok, I found what I was looking for.

And I misspoke yesterday in that the USSC doesn't hear cases from states based on whether or not the issue is a federal issue, it's specifically as stated below only involved if the case is a US Constitution issue as the EC is.


Q. Can a Michigan Supreme Court decision be appealed?

A. Generally, no - not if the decision solely involves state law. The Michigan Supreme Court is the "court of last resort," meaning it makes final decisions about the interpretation of state law. There are no further ways to appeal such cases.

An appeal can only be made if a case involves legal questions related to the U.S. Constitution. Example federal issues might include the First Amendment (freedoms of speech, press, religion, petition, and assembly) or the Fourth Amendment (search and seizure).

Why? State courts interpret the U.S. Constitution, but they must follow the rulings of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). In legal lingo, this is called binding precedent or binding authority.

If a party thinks the Michigan Supreme Court has not interpreted the federal Constitution correctly, they may appeal their case directly to SCOTUS; however, the federal Supreme Court only grants certiorari in (takes) select cases that have national significance, which in practice is a small number each year.


So, my opinion stands in that the court case that's currently active is about curtailing the Michigan governor's emergency powers. That does not have federal standing as a constitutional issue because governors are directed by their state's laws and state constitution. The USSC heard the case concerning the Electoral issue because the EC is a federal constitution directive to states.

So Phage, you may disagree all you want but that is how the many sources I looked at define it. The court's own definition is what I am going by, not just what I feel it should be.

After a lot of consideration, there are still two issues - the recall and curtailing the governor's emergency powers as DTOM originally posted. The recall is based on her disobeying state laws regarding working with the legislature on the extensions, that is going forward. Curtailing her emergency powers still only deals with state law, not federal law, so that stops at the Michigan SC after the ruling. That is my opinion as I read the law and the courts' decisions.

My only concerns about this right now are can we get enough signatures on the petitions in time to recall her, then how long is it going to take to settle the emergency powers case if the MISC doesn't want to fast-track it. We will see how it works out, she's going to have another press conference this morning, probably to tell us she's rolling back the lockdown to the previous stage because of the outbreaks. Again, she is not working with our legislature as the law requires her to do so I suspect there will be mass disobedience of anything she says today.

I also read this morning that WalMart is mandating masks or you can't go in. I'll be going elsewhere just on that point alone, masked or not. If my vascular surgeon's office knows it's not as deadly as TPTB are claiming, I'm not going to listen to any politician about it.



new topics

top topics



 
48
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join