do I really have to say it???
Posted on 05/23/2014 2:05:33 PM PDT by jazusamo
This post was updated at 4:40 p.m. ET.
A federal judge in Detroit has ruled that Democratic Rep. John Conyers, the second-most-senior member of the U.S. House, will appear on the August primary ballot, overturning a decision by Michigan's secretary of state who said the candidacy was invalid.
Was there any legal justification beyond “I’m a federal judge and I say so?”
Did you really expect anything less? Seems rules are only for the sheeple not for our elite masters! /s
Yes. The word is OLIGARCHY. Rule by a small number of people.
Yes, and the criminal actions of both 0bama and Holder only encourage the activist judges like this one in ignoring the rule of law.
I really do think we have the ability at FR to introduce terms into the national conversation.
There’s “peasant law”, and then there’s Law For Our Betters...
do I really have to say it???
States are empowered to determine the qualifications to get on the ballot for Federal Office as long as those standards do not conflict with any other section of the Constitution.
In fact, for POTUS a State is not even required to hold a general election with universal suffrage. A state can appoint its electors by any criteria they choose...as long as it does not conflict with other sections of the Constitution.
separated at birth???
Of course John Conyers is qualified to be on the ballot. And Rahm Emanuel was a resident of Chicago in 2011. And Frank Lautenberg was eligible for to run for governor when Bob Torricelli bailed. And Barry Soetoro was born, well, wherever the heck he wanted to have been born . . .
The answer was: "No. Duggan has two distinct advantages over Conyers. Duggan had a lot of financial backers, and he is in his right mind."
Of course John Conyers is qualified to be on the ballot. And Rahm Emanuel was a resident of Chicago in 2011. And Frank Lautenberg was eligible for to run for senator when Bob Torricelli bailed. And Barry Soetoro was born, well, wherever the heck he wanted to have been born . . .
From a USA article I just found:
____________________________________________________________
But Leitman said the signatures from at least two ciruclators who were found to have not registered properly to vote, a requirement under state law, should be reinstated, giving Conyers enough valid signatures to be on the ballot.
“There is evidence that their failure to comply with the Registration Statute was the result of good faith mistakes and that they believed they were in compliance with the statute,” Leitman said in his ruling.
____________________________________________________________
Sounds pretty thin to me, seems the SoS would be in a much better position than a federal judge to determine that, the people either legally registered or they didn’t.
Lemme guess. The judge is a COMMIE/MARXIST/LIBERAL bastard.
I hate these people. Truly hate them.
>> The word is OLIGARCHY. Rule by a small number of people.
The party thinks it IS the government. See tag line.
The sad part is that he’s going to win....
Thank you. I wonder what would happen if I tried that defense when I broke the law?*
(*I know perfectly well what would happen.)
Correct. And if the number of people is small enough, then they are also called a "junta." In some countries, they are called a "politburo." This should provide a clue as to the type of system we are living under.
Why do I have to follow the law?
None of these guys do - and they write the law.
Oh gosh I am soooo very surprised. Not
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.