  Jhartmich Member Username: Jhartmich Post Number: 167 Registered: 04-2006 |
Just thinking: If a governor can't remove (govern) politicians, then would that not disallow her from having the state take over cities, municipalities, school boards (Detroit), etc.? If this thing carries weight and she is stripped of what she describes as ADMINISTRATIVE hearings (not criminal), then couldn't everyone (mayors, city managers, school boards) use the same argument and make the claim that she has no authority? What about criminal pardons? If the courts side with Kwame's attorneys, wouldn't that also prevent her from having any authority in criminal pardons? Would the courts really allow this Pandora's Box to be opened? | ||
Waymooreland Member Username: Waymooreland Post Number: 91 Registered: 11-2007 |
I was thinking the same thing and my conclusion is that Kwame's defense is just grasping at straws at this point. I think this is just a last-ditch, total desperation move that's not likely to succeed. It's like jacking up a half-court shot at the buzzer when you're down three points in a basketball game. The odds of making the shot are extremely low, but you're already 99% sure you're going to lose anyway, so why not try? | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 355 Registered: 06-2008 |
I don't really understand this thread. where did you ever get the idea that she lacks the authority to remove city politicians? Michigan law expressly gives her this authority. if you're confused by this argument that KK's lawyers were making in court today, don't be...it's a weak argument that lacks any basis for the judge to rule in favor of, and even if he did, it would only apply to these particular circumstances and not to other removal action of the governor. | ||
Rid0617 Member Username: Rid0617 Post Number: 273 Registered: 03-2008 |
It sure shows his selfishness is more important than the good of Detroit | ||
Jhartmich Member Username: Jhartmich Post Number: 170 Registered: 04-2006 |
Sharon McPhail stated that she doesn't believe the Governor has the authority to remove the mayor. That's what I was referring to. http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs .dll/article?AID=2008808210381 | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 356 Registered: 06-2008 |
"Sharon McPhail stated that she doesn't believe the Governor has the authority to remove the mayor. That's what I was referring to." Yeah, well, I would say that it's pretty clear that the judge will find that to be a losing argument. The statute is not ambiguous in the least bit. It clearly confers this authority on the governor. See for yourself. MCL § 168.327 http://tinyurl.com/6qup2l | ||
Mwilbert Member Username: Mwilbert Post Number: 353 Registered: 11-2007 |
As lawyers tend to do, McPhail is making any argument she can that she can manage to emit without turning purple laughing, but no judge is going to buy it. As thejesus says, the statute unambiguously gives the governor the power to remove the mayor. The only question is whether she has the grounds. | ||
Mwilbert Member Username: Mwilbert Post Number: 354 Registered: 11-2007 |
And the will. | ||
Jhartmich Member Username: Jhartmich Post Number: 171 Registered: 04-2006 |
Thanks for the link Thejesus. | ||
Jhartmich Member Username: Jhartmich Post Number: 173 Registered: 04-2006 |
A little more that led to my post, which is, as you guys stated, the mayor's attorney trying everything he can: "The mayor's attorneys claims the governor is biased, that her level of proof to remove him is "vague," and that state law is unclear on the governor's powers in this case." http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20080829/M ETRO/808290433 I agree with those that said the law is clear. My point in this post was, wouldn't this open a HUGE can of worms IF the judge agreed with Kwame's attorneys? (Message edited by jhartmich on August 29, 2008) | ||
Novine Member Username: Novine Post Number: 725 Registered: 07-2007 |
Yes but as everyone has said, that's not going to happen. Here's a tip. Anytime you read "Sharon McPhail stated that she doesn't believe...", assume the opposite to be true and you'll be right 99.999% of the time. |
