U.S. District Court Won’t Issue Temporary Restraining Order Against Maine Ban on Out-of-State Initiative Petitioners

On January 11, U.S. District Court Judge John A. Woodcock, a Bush Jr.. appointee, declined to issue a Temporary Restraining Order blocking the Maine ban on initiative petitioners who don’t live in Maine and aren’t registered in Maine. We the People PAC v Bellows, 1:20cv-489.

The judge wrote, “Even though the plaintiffs raised serious legal issues, because the caselaw in this area is nuanced, because the plaintiffs failed to provide a sufficient uncontested factual record, and because the plaintiffs delayed bringing this lawsuit, they failed to sustain their burden…Thus the Court dismisses without prejudice the motion for a temporary restraining order.” The issue of the law’s constitutionality will proceed, but in the meantime the initiative proponents who brought the lawsuit won’t have any immediate relief. See the 46-page order.


Comments

U.S. District Court Won’t Issue Temporary Restraining Order Against Maine Ban on Out-of-State Initiative Petitioners — 9 Comments

  1. Each State is a NATION-STATE.

    1776 DOI last para.
    1777 Art Confed.
    1783 USA-Brit Peace Treaty.
    1787 USA Const – esp Art VII.

    Internal politics – Outside folks — none of your biz.

    SCOTUS hacks — brain dead about BASIC stuff.

  2. Each US state also has to follow the Constitution, which includes not banning or censoring the speech of American citizens from other states.

  3. Any ballot access petition AIN’T a *** to petition the Government for a redress of grievances ***

    [related to Brit/Am Colony govt suppression of such GRIEVANCE petitions in 1761-1776].

    See Book –

    Sources of Our Liberties ed by Richard L Perry – ABA, 1959.

    SCOTUS MORONS at work since 1968 — screwing up ballot access petitions – candidates and issues.

  4. Asking people to sign a petition is free speech. American citizens do not give up their free speech rights when they enter US states or territories in which they do not regularly reside.

  5. The U.S. Supreme Court said in Meyer v Grant that a ballot access petition (in that case, for an initiative) is free speech. The U.S. Supreme Court said it again in Buckley v American Constitutional Law Foundation, another case involving initiative petitions.

  6. RW –

    SCOTUS once said that separate race stuff was ok — 1896-1954.

    See Const Anno — Appendix of OVER-ruled SCOTUS ops —

    including some election law ops.

    IE in MANY law subjects SCOTUS ops are as good as newspaper headlines from 300 years ago

    — due to SCOTUS being full of party HACKS chosen by party hacks Prezs and confirmed by party hack Sens.

    How much packing of SCOTUS coming shortly ??? –

    now 6 rightists / 3 leftists — HIGH on list of RED commie Donkey agenda

    — esp with 50-50 tie in Senate.

  7. Maine is not a separate country. If they want to ban, or censor, the speech of American citizens who do not regularly reside in Maine, they should secede from the union and become their own country. Until that happens, they have no legal right to ban or censor the speech of their fellow American citizens who do not regularly reside in Maine.

  8. Earlier parts of the Federalist have attempts of multiple nation-state govts in a FEDERAL structure with LIMITED Powers — all broke down.

    1787 USA Const – attempt to repair 1777 Art Confed.

    TOTAL subversion/perversion of 1-8-1 General Welfare [since 1936] and 1-8-3 Interstate Commerce [since 1870s] by SCOTUS hacks —

    RESULT — States de facto D-E-A-D at moment — mere pass thru agents of Fed tax/borrow LOOT.

    SCOTUS surely to be packed with open RED commie Donkey hacks.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.