Court Document
Michigan Civil Rights Initiative v. Board of State Canvassers
Henry William Saad, Presiding Judge
In our October 31, 2005 Order, this Court granted the Complaint for Mandamus and ordered the Board of State Canvassers to forthwith approve the petitions for placement on the November 2006 ballot. Our Opinion and Order adhered to well-established Michigan law that strictly limits the powers of the Board of State Canvassers and vests the power with the people, through the ballot initiative process, to amend our State Constitution. Following a series of motions filed by all parties, this Court issued our December 7, 2005 Order that explicitly directed the Board of State Canvassers to approve and certify the petitions forthwith and ordered the Secretary of State to thereafter take all necessary measures to place the initiative on the November 2006 general election ballot. The December 7, 2005 Order also contained mandatory language that “this directive shall have immediate effect.” Under Michigan law, this means that, absent a stay from our Supreme Court, nothing shall interfere with the execution of this Court’s Order. Notwithstanding this Court’s December 7, 2005 clear and unconditional directive, certain members of the Board of State Canvassers failed to comply with our Court’s Order and thus, once again, the Board of State Canvassers failed to discharge its legal obligation under our State Constitution, statutes, and Court Orders to certify the petitions. This failure by a public body to comply with this Court’s Order requires us to again address this matter. Furthermore, this failure by the Board of State Canvassers wrongfully thwarts and interferes with the clear constitutional mandate that the citizens of this State have the right to amend or not amend their Constitution by vote of the people. And, because we are a nation of laws, this Court may address, in separate contempt proceedings, what appears to be the misconduct of those board members who failed, once again, to comply with duly-issued orders of this Court. These contempt proceedings will be the subject of another Order from this Court. Neither the ardor of a few demonstrators, nor the failure of public officials to discharge their oath of office or to follow controlling orders of this Court, can be allowed to undermine the rule of law that is so essential to our form of government. In this Order, however, this Court addresses only the question of the placement of this initiative on the November 2006 ballot.
Accordingly, because the Board of State Canvassers has failed to discharge its legal obligations, and because the form of the petitions comply with the statutory requirements, and the Board previously concluded that there are sufficient signatures for certification, this Court orders the Secretary of State to forthwith take all necessary steps and measures, consistent with State election laws, to place the initiative on the November 2006 ballot. This Order shall have immediate effect under MCR 7.215(F)(2) which means that, absent a stay from our Supreme Court, nothing shall interfere with the Secretary of State’s immediate execution of this Order. We retain jurisdiction. Signed - - ### - - |
