I've been tracking these since December. Michigan

@littlecarrotq Wisconsin case:
https://t.co/MTx8OnAGZr
@littlecarrotq Georgia case:
https://t.co/OCna73PHXu
@littlecarrotq Arizona case:
https://t.co/MX6PvYs4st
@littlecarrotq Another Pennsylvania case. This is the most important one in my opinion. It shows the Republican Legislature broke the law when they created a mail-in ballot law in October, 2019, which they knew was against the state Constitution.
https://t.co/WYp9x6dCWE
@littlecarrotq Other Pennsylvania case:
https://t.co/jFbebr1NUE
@littlecarrotq Third Pennsylvania case, this one is from the Republican State Legislature trying to bail themselves out of what they did in October of 2019. They already had a conference on this one:
https://t.co/CrlQTn6YTQ
@littlecarrotq Fifth Pennsylvania case, which I believe they combined with the previous one:
https://t.co/991yMgQIWR
@littlecarrotq Another Wisconsin case. President Trump just filed a Supplemental Brief on Feb 09 2021.

https://t.co/p3b7u3UbbK

More from Law

Today the superior court will hear oral arguments in Midtown Citizens Coalition v. Municipality of Anchorage. "MCC" is an unofficial group that opposes the recall of Assembly member Felix Rivera. The question is whether the Muni properly certified the recall petition. #aklaw


Before posting the MCC v. MOA briefs, it's worth noting that the legal arguments made by Rivera's supporters parallel those made by Dunleavy in Recall Dunleavy v. State. Both Rivera and Dunleavy argued that their recall petitions should have been denied by election officials.

So let's play a game called "Who Argued It." Guess which politician, Rivera or Dunleavy, made the following arguments in court:

1. "The grounds for recall stated in the petition are insufficient as a matter of law, and therefore the petition should have been rejected."


2. "Even under Alaska’s liberal recall standards, courts have not hesitated to find petitions legally insufficient when those petitions did not contain sufficient factual allegations of unlawful activity to state sufficient grounds for recall.”

3. "The allegations must be sufficiently particular to allow the official a meaningful opportunity to respond . . . . [and] ensure that voters have the information they need to vote."

You May Also Like