Connect with us

Michigan

Experts say Michigan law 'has the back' of election workers and voters – WDET 101.9 FM

Published

on

Experts say Michigan law 'has the back' of election workers and voters – WDET 101.9 FM


Experts say election workers and even voters face an almost unprecedented amount of tactics designed to intimidate them.

A recent poll from Bloomberg/Morning Consult found that roughly 50% of registered voters across a group of swing-states — including Michigan — aren’t confident the election and its aftermath will be free from violence.

But a new analysis finds both federal and Michigan law offer ample protections against bullying at the polls.

The Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law studied voters’ rights in political battleground states including Michigan.

Advertisement

Senior Counsel Eliza Sweren-Becker says anyone encountering trouble at the ballot box has many options available to defend themselves.

Listen: Experts say Michigan law ‘has the back’ of election workers and voters


The following interview was edited for clarity.

Eliza Sweren-Becker, Brennan Center for Justice: Federal law sets a floor preventing and prohibiting intimidation of voters and election officials. And those laws are quite strong. They’ve been on the books for a long time and they’ve been enforced for many, many years. The states can go above and beyond that floor to protect voters against intimidation. And they do, in fact, do that. The laws that are specific to Michigan are really complimentary and consistent with the existing federal laws. They’re enforced by different prosecutors as opposed to U.S. attorneys and employees of the U.S. Department of Justice. The laws in Michigan also go to some of the more specific election-related issues that may be occurring in Michigan. For example, Michigan law places a number of guardrails around voter challenges. And that’s something that federal law doesn’t get deeply in the weeds of. But Michigan law constrains them in a number of different ways.

Advertisement

Quinn Klinefelter, WDET News: There was a controversy at the central Detroit location where they counted votes in the last presidential election. Officials moved some observers out, they complained that they were getting in the way of counting votes, more or less. And those poll watchers claimed that they were being sent out of the area so that they would not see any fraud being committed. What do you suggest either the poll watchers or the workers do in such a situation?

ES: Not knowing the specifics, if those who were present at the vote-counting site were intimidating the election workers or disrupting the election processes, then the election officials and workers were appropriately removing folks. Election observers remained at that vote-counting site and nothing inappropriate happened as a result of those removals. The thing that was inappropriate was the disruptive and intimidating conduct.

QK: Are there any differences in Michigan’s voter intimidation laws as opposed to other states that surprise you in any way?

ES: The protections against intimidating election officials in Michigan, for example, are quite specific. And that’s an issue that we’ve seen come up in Michigan in recent years. And so, the law affords particular protections for election workers and officials explicitly in the Michigan code. And while it’s true that every election worker and poll worker is protected against intimidation, the level of specificity may differ in certain states. It’s a clear and strong protection for election officials and election workers in Michigan.

QK: That’s certainly become an issue in Michigan, as many election workers have talked about fear over their safety, not just during election day or when they are counting votes, but they oftentimes get threatening voicemails or other things directed at them even after a certain candidate has lost. Are there steps that can be taken either during the actual vote counting if intimidation occurs, or something else that election workers can do nowadays, compared to the past, if it happens before or after election day?

Advertisement

ES: If there are issues that are occurring at a polling place, for example, intimidation by a poll watcher or a challenger, poll workers in Michigan have the authority to remove that disruptive or intimidating poll watcher or challenger from the voting premises. So it’s not just a remedy after the fact. But if there’s instances of misconduct, as they’re occurring poll workers have the power to stop that in its tracks.

QK: If something develops that’s of concern on election day itself, a lot of times you’ll hear major political parties say, “We have attorneys at the ready.” And they say they’ll go to court to make sure that this or that is addressed in some way. For the various workers or voters, for that matter, who might be waiting to cast their vote or in the midst of doing so, what would you suggest they try to do? Especially if they don’t seem to have a group of attorneys at the ready. Are there particular ways that they should protest that they feel like they are being intimidated, or particular officials they should protest that to?

ES: Yes. If somebody is going to the courthouse to vindicate voting access and voting rights, typically the remedy they might get is, for example, an extension of polling place hours to ensure that voters have the opportunity to cast their ballots and any disruption that may have taken place doesn’t infringe on the number of hours that voters are entitled to be able to vote on election day. But in the moment of intimidating or disruptive conduct, the first thing I’d recommend is that a voter alert an election worker to that conduct. Those workers, again, have the authority to maintain order within the polling place. And voters can also call a nonpartisan election protection hotline if they are observing anything that they think is out of the ordinary, that is disruptive, that is intimidating. That is a way to pass along those concerns and complaints. And it could enable that person or set of voters to actually get representation if needed, because nonpartisan lawyers participate in that election protection hotline to make sure that every vote cast counts on election day. That number for election protection is (866) “OUR-VOTE.” There are strong existing state laws and federal laws — including state laws in Michigan — that protect voters from intimidation, election interference and disruption. And laws that likewise protect election officials and election workers. So while it’s something that we are watching very closely, voters and election officials should know that the law has their back.

Trusted, accurate, up-to-date.

WDET strives to make our journalism accessible to everyone. As a public media institution, we maintain our journalistic integrity through independent support from readers like you. If you value WDET as your source of news, music and conversation, please make a gift today.

Donate today »

Advertisement

  • Quinn Klinefelter is a Senior News Editor at 101.9 WDET. In 1996, he was literally on top of the news when he interviewed then-Senator Bob Dole about his presidential campaign and stepped on his feet.

    View all posts

    Advertisement



Source link

Michigan

Bills to end concealed carry permit requirement introduced in Michigan House

Published

on

Bills to end concealed carry permit requirement introduced in Michigan House


A group of Republicans in the Michigan House say Michiganders’ second amendment rights are being infringed, as they introduce legislation to end requirements for concealed carry permits.

Right now, Michiganders must obtain a permit to carry a concealed gun, with a base fee of $100.

As part of the process, applicants must also receive training.

“The first thing they do is put you in a classroom, make sure you know all proper range and safety procedures, run you over what the law states about when and if you’re allowed to use your firearm,” Jonathan Hold, president of the Michigan chapter of Giffords Gun Owners for Safety and a firearms instructor, said. “It gives a really good grounding.”

Advertisement

Applicants must demonstrate four hours of range time as well.

The group of House Republicans feel this is an undue burden, noting many gun owners are already knowledgeable.

They also believe the current five-year felony for carrying without a permit is too steep.

“For the government of the state of Michigan to tell that that we have to be qualified under the guise of their rules in order to protect ourselves is a far cry from what the constitution provides for us,” Rep. Jay DeBoyer, (R- Clay) said.

The package of bills wouldn’t abolish permits, as they are necessary to take guns outside of the state, but it would institute what’s called “constitutional carry.”

Advertisement

That means Michiganders can carry a gun on them without a permit.

Twenty-nine other states already adopted such policies.

“When we exercise other first amendment rights like our right to speak, we do not have to get a permit or permission from the government to speak,” Rep. Jim DeSana (R- Carleton) said. “When we exercise our right to worship, we do not have to go get a permit or permission to go worship.”

Supporters say concealed guns are important for self-defense, and can also help stop crime.

“It’s going to encourage and increase safety for all,” Rep. Joseph Fox (R- Fremont) said. “It’s about protecting everybody because if there are guns in this situation, and people are worried for their lives, they’re gonna stay back away from evil and making bad choices.”

Advertisement

Gun control advocates like Gold, however, say it’s “ridiculous” not to have guardrails.

“We’re talking about the power of life and death at a distance,” Gold said. “To send an untrained user out into the world with a firearm is a mistake.”

He also takes issue with the constitution argument.

“The constitution says as part of a well regulated militia, if you read the second amendment, and we don’t have well regulated militias in this country,” Gold said. “At the very least, what we should have are trained firearms users.”

A similar effort to end concealed carry permits failed to gain traction last year in the Michigan Senate, and with the landscape unchanged, the bills likely have an uphill battle to become law.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Michigan

Werewolf, trout ruled in ’24. What will be next ‘I voted’ sticker

Published

on

Werewolf, trout ruled in ’24. What will be next ‘I voted’ sticker


play

The rewarding feeling of wearing an “I Voted” sticker after turning in your ballot is something everyone can relate to.

Michigan voters can take it one step farther and vote on the design for the Election Day tradition.

Advertisement

The Michigan Department of State announced on March 3 the return of the highly competitive “I Voted” sticker contest in preparation for the state’s general election on Tuesday, Nov. 3.

“Our first-ever ‘I Voted’ sticker design contest in 2024 was a massive success,” Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson said in a March 3 release. “This year we look forward to seeing the creative ways Michiganders of all ages celebrate democracy. Submit your entry to help us continue the tradition and get voters excited to cast their ballot this fall.”

Designs are being accepted online via the Secretary of State’s “I Voted” webpage: Michigan.gov/IVotedSticker. On the page, participants may print or download the official entry form.

Design and entry rules, the sticker template, and tips and suggestions are included on the official entry form.

Advertisement

There are three categories — elementary/middle school (grades K-8), high school (grades 9-12) and Michigan residents of all ages. Designs are due at 5 p.m. on Friday, May 1.

Once submissions are closed, the public may vote for finalists online in June. Winners will be announced and celebrated later in the summer. Winning stickers will be dispersed to local election clerks for the November Election.

In 2024, there were more than 480 submissions, and more than 57,700 voters selected the nine winners, according to the release. Before the contest opened up for a public vote, the Michigan Collegiate Student Advisory Task Force members narrowed the submissions down to 25 semifinalists. 

Advertisement

Here’s the 2024 winners and rules for the 2026 participants:

What did the winning 2024 ‘I Voted’ sticker designs look like?

Want to enter a design? Here are the ‘I Voted’ sticker contest rules

According to the Secretary of State, here’s what to keep in mind for your sticker:

  • Designs must be completed using official entry form.
  • Designs must include the phrase “I voted” AND be nonpartisan in nature.
  • Artwork must be original, non-AI generated, and not contain copyrighted or trademarked designs.
  • Entries can be created using your preferred method (digital, paint, crayon, mixed media, etc.)
  • Provide as high quality of resolution as possible when submitting your design.
  • There are three categories — elementary/middle school (grades K-8), high school (grades 9-12) and Michigan residents of all ages. You may enter one design in one category.
  • Designs are due at 5 p.m. on Friday, May 1.

Contact Sarah Moore @ smoore@lsj.com



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Michigan

2 Smoothie King employees fired for refusing to serve customer in Trump hoodie

Published

on

2 Smoothie King employees fired for refusing to serve customer in Trump hoodie


Two employees who refused to serve a man and his wife because he was wearing a hoodie with President Trump’s name on it were fired after a video of the heated encounter went viral.

Erika Lindemyer and her husband, Jake, were forced out of a Smoothie King franchise location in Ann Arbor, Michigan, following a fiery clash with two young female workers on Sunday.

Jake and Erika Lindemyer were denied service at a Smoothie King location in Michigan on Sunday. Leftism/X

The employees claimed they didn’t “feel comfortable” serving the couple because of Jake’s pro-Trump hoodie, as captured by Erika in a viral video.

Jake and Erika fired back at the pair and insisted that they were being “discriminated” against based on their “political views.”

Advertisement
Both of the employees told them to leave. Leftism/X

“We were just wanting a smoothie and you literally looked at us and I asked you if everything was OK and you said ‘We don’t feel comfortable serving you’ because of my husband’s hoodie. That is discrimination,” Erika spat.

“Okay, well, have a great day,” the first employee said.

“That is illegal,” Erika tried to insist again.

“I said Trump discriminates [against] us,” another employee chimed in.

“Okay, well that has nothing to do with us getting a smoothie!” Erika guffawed.

Advertisement
Erika and Jake claimed they were being discriminated against. Leftism/X

“OK, well that’s who you support though, that’s who you love,” the first employee chided.

“What’s embarrassing is that we’re American citizens and I wanted to get a smoothie,” Erika huffed.

The second employee noted that they “have a right to refuse service” and directed the couple to the exit.

“You asked a question and [the other employee] gave you an answer. Have a great day. Have a great day. The door’s right there,” the second worker said.

The employees said they were “uncomfortable” serving the couple because Jake was wearing a piece of
Trump merchandise. Leftism/X

Erika threatened to call the police while storming out, but it’s unclear if she did.

Advertisement

In a separate video shared Monday, one of the workers joked that she might’ve “accidentally started a race war” and called on the public to help remove Erika’s video.

“I am a minor and she recorded me without my permission. The people in the comments are all white and they’re all being hella racist, guys, please help me get this video taken down,” she implored.

Smoothie King confirmed that the girls involved in the viral confrontation “are no longer with the business” as of Monday.

The girl posted her own video joking she might’ve “accidentally started a race war.” Leftism/X

“As a brand, Smoothie King is committed to ensuring our stores are a place free of discrimination of any kind, where every guest and team member is treated with care and respect,” the company wrote on X.

The owner of the Ann Arbor franchise location will also enforce “mandatory retraining for all employees that outlines our guest experience standards.”

Advertisement

In early December, a woman who worked at a Target in California was berated by a customer for wearing a Charlie Kirk “Freedom” T-shirt.

When the employee insisted she was allowed to wear the red shirt, the irate customer accused her of supporting “a racist.”

The medical center where the agitated customer worked was bombarded with upwards of 6,000 “profanity-laced” phone calls after online sleuths doxxed her personal information.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending