Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

FBaggins

(28,244 posts)
1. Palmer gets it wrong yet again
Thu Dec 8, 2016, 01:05 AM
Dec 2016
a federal judge ruled that he didn’t have the authority to override the 3-1 decision by the decision by the Michigan Board of Canvassers to shut down the recount.

No he didn't. He didn't even talk about it except to cite their original statutory 2-day wait. Instead, he references state courts' ability to interpret state law.

However, this federal court move is not a ruling against Jill Stein, but rather a punt.

Nope. He ruled directly against a number of her claims.

"Nor have Plaintiffs shown an entitlement to a recount that derives from a source other than the recount procedures established by the Michigan Legislature. "

"There is no case law recognizing an independent federal right to a recount that either this Court or the parties have come across, in the absence of actual deprivation of voting rights"

"... invoking a court’s aid to remedy that problem in the manner Plaintiffs have chosen... has never been endorsed by any court"

"In tandem with their new claims, Plaintiffs’ response to the motions to dissolve argues that the TRO should be preserved on either of two alternative bases: (i) that the Michigan Court of Appeals’ ruling on the “aggrieved party” issue represents a “distorted interpretation of the text” of Mich. Comp. Laws § 168.879, see Pls. Resp. at 3-4; and (ii) that Plaintiffs have a federal constitutional right to a recount independent of the state statutory scheme providing for a recount, see id. at 10. The Court finds neither argument persuasive."


Palmer also mistakenly claims that the recount isn't dead because Stein will still appeal to the state and federal Supreme Courts. The problem there is that there's almost no chance that either will help her. It can't get to the USSC without first going back through the federal appellate court that just ruled yesterday that the state courts get to interpret state law... and the state Supreme Court is 5-2 Republican. I'm not sure that they'll even take the case.

It would be more accurate reporting to say that the recount is dead and Stein is praying for a miracle to resuscitate it.




Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Michigan recount is NOT d...»Reply #1