Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Protect MI Constitution v. Secretary of State

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided August 14, 2012No. Docket No. 311504Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partRonayne Krause, J.

This is another unfortunate case throwing into sharp relief two longstanding problems with the Michigan referendum process: first, poor drafting can preclude the people of this state from being able to express their will at the polls; and second, the Secretary of State needs clearer authority explicitly stating its duties, if any, to filter ballot proposals that do not conform to the requirements of our Constitution. I do not take issue with the majority’s conclusion that the ballot initiative at issue in this matter does not, in fact, conform to the requirements of our Constitution for…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. People ex rel. Sutherland v. GovernorMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
  2. Leininger v. Secretary of StateMichigan Supreme Court · 1947
  3. Michigan United Conservation Clubs v. Secretary of StateMichigan Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Thompson v. Secretary of StateMichigan Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Scott v. Secretary of StateMichigan Supreme Court · 1918

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API