Michigan Supreme Court Puts Pro-Choice Measure On Ballot

A 5-2 majority of the Michigan Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a pro-choice amendment seeking to enshrine abortion rights in the Michigan constitution would appear on this November’s ballot, despite a challenge from anti-abortion activists that focused on the spacing between the printed words of the proposed amendment.


This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1431568
1 Like

even though there is no dispute that every word appears and appears legibly and in the correct order, and there is no evidence that anyone was confused about the text, two members of the Board of State Canvassers with the power to do so would keep the petition from the voters for what they purport to be a technical violation of the statute.

Yet… two of the seven state supreme court justices voted against permitting the ballot measure to go forward.

35 Likes

Very, very good news! As long as the measure is approved. Thank dog for Kansas who showed them the way.

25 Likes
28 Likes

This is huge. This is logical.
Those 2 Republicans on the Board of Canvassers deserve to be called “undemocratic assholes.”
Hope their neighbors remind them loudly and longly.

19 Likes
16 Likes

Hopefully everybody will read Josh’s thoughts about this. He makes some great points.

Josh Marshall weighs in

9 Likes

I am just imagining if every email the guys who objected to the word spacing is sent back to them in the future just saying “Sorry can’t read it. Kerning issues.”

8 Likes

Isn’t this what SCOTUS and all Republicans wanted? The question of abortion rights should be decided by “the people” and not the courts?

27 Likes

Zowie, that chief justice’s concurrence. Seems like the judicial equivalent of throwing acid on the two Board of Canvassers freaks.

22 Likes

Only if the people make the correct decision as determined by the Bible-thumping freaks they want to pander to.

19 Likes

He does indeed and I’d like to repeat the main one: The state Supreme Court fixed this, but as @occamscoin points out, two voted to accede to this naked effort to thwart the will of the people and simply ignore election law “because they can.” We can’t rely on some institution to save democracy. We have to do it ourselves. We have to turn the hell out and vote. We can do this! We outnumber them! But a fashionably jaded lassitude, complacently saying the fix is in there’s nothing you can do, that ain’t helping. Get mad and get in the trenches and for Christ’s sake let’s get this done.

35 Likes

Totally agree – so long as “the people” means “people with wombs deciding for themselves”.

13 Likes

No, Alito & Co. wanted the states, i.e., the independent state legislatures, to decide. He didn’t say anything about the voters or residents of the states.

14 Likes

Were they appointed by Drumpf, or were they elected by the MAGGOT crowd?

1 Like

The days of “fashionably jaded lassitude” are over! When I get off this bus, I’m burning my fedora!

6 Likes

State (Michigan) mistake

1 Like

Yes indeed - here he is in all his strident - screw fair play / discard objectivity - glory

Justice Brian K. Zahra a truly polarized mind!!!

  • Officer of the Catholic Lawyers Society -
  • Past officer - Federalist Society,
  • judicial advisor- Hillsdale College Federalist Society Chapter

18 Likes

You didn’t specify which people

4 Likes

:face_vomiting:

I have a feeling he’s on some SC short list. Sammy A would love working with him.

7 Likes