Morse recall validated

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/po ... l-petition

hmmm.

First ever recall election of a Colorado legislator. Morse must think he is going to lose this because he is appealing to the courts on a legal technicality. C'mon, let the people speak. (Denver Post this morning.)

I said it would never get this far... and I'll say again... it will never get to a vote (channeling your 285 liberals... and if you think that's easy to find that mind to channel)

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: and I'll say again... it will never get to a vote

Why not?

OmniScience wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: and I'll say again... it will never get to a vote

Why not?

Never mind... you evidently missed my sarcasm. Go back and reread what I wrote... all of it.

Even getting this far shows how powerful pro-2nd amendment people are. Overturning 137 years of history and that includes a lot of corrupt politicians.

So it looks as though the recall petitions will be thrown out since they failed to include critical elements that the law required. Must be embarrassing for the drafters of those petitions.

Something the Dog Said wrote: So it looks as though the recall petitions will be thrown out since they failed to include critical elements that the law required. Must be embarrassing for the drafters of those petitions.

No... it looks like the state will consider the language of the petition (they have 30 days to do so) and then, if the state decides it's OK... then it may move into the courts. Unless you have information that every other citizen in the state doesn't have?

I know how you like to be accurate.

I was of course expressing my personal opinion that the Morse recall petitions would be thrown out as a matter of law. While the self proclaimed Honeybadger, Scott Gessler will no doubt ignore the law and approve the petitions, the courts will most likely follow the precedent of the Colorado Court of Appeals set in Combs v. Nowak where it decided that petitions for recalling city officials which failed to include the exact same language as the Morse recall petitions failed to include were invalid for that reason. In that case, a hearing officer found the petitions to be deficient since it omitted that language. A court then held that the Colorado Constitution did not apply since the recall was for city officials, not state officials. The Court of Appeals overturned the trial court and found that the Constitution did apply and upheld the hearing officer.

Article 21 of the Colorado Constitution requires that any petition for recall of an elected official include an election of the successor to the officer named in said petition. That Constitutional requirement is implemented in Colorado Revised Statutes 1-12-103 that states:

1-12-103. Petition for recall - statement of grounds

Eligible electors of a political subdivision may initiate the recall of an elected official by signing a petition which demands the election of a successor to the officer named in the petition. The petition shall contain a general statement, consisting of two hundred words or less, stating the ground or grounds on which the recall is sought. The general statement may not include any profane or false statements. The statement is for the information of the electors who are the sole and exclusive judges of the legality, reasonableness, and sufficiency of the ground or grounds assigned for the recall. The ground or grounds are not open to review.

The idiots circulating the petition failed to include any such demand for an election of a successor to Morse. Apparently they just wanted to recall Morse with no thought to calling for an election to fill his position.

So, yes, my personal opinion is that the courts will follow the law and find the petitions to be deficient.

Something the Dog Said wrote:
[snip]

So, yes, my personal opinion is that the courts will follow the law and find the petitions to be deficient.

And it is still your personal opinion until the state or courts decide otherwise.