Posted on Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 12:58 p.m.
Washtenaw County clerk says factuality portion of Michigan's recall law is unconstitutional
By Danielle Arndt
- 6 Ann Arbor school board members prepare for recall hearing
- Ann Arbor parents submit language to recall 6 school board members
On the day that Washtenaw County Clerk Larry Kestenbaum is scheduled to determine the clarity and factuality of recall language filed against Ann Arbor school board trustees, he released a statement saying he will refuse to issue any ruling on the factuality of the recall language.
Kestenbaum is one of three members of the County Elections Commission who will be reviewing the recall language filed by the group Ann Arbor Public Schools Parents for Change, trying to remove six school board members from office.
The clarity/factuality hearing takes place at 1 p.m. Thursday at the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners meeting room, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. It is open to the public.
Kestenbaum said in an email Thursday he has come to the conclusion that the new requirement of factuality in recall language is "unconstitutional on its face."
A new law passed in December 2012 makes it so the petitioner has the burden of factuality when filing recall language.
Kestenbaum said: "The submission of reasons for recall is a procedural, and not a substantive matter. And the targeted official may not impose delay by contesting whether those reasons for recall are 'good enough'." He says that judgement is up to the people and is based in the petitioner's ability to collect the prerequisite number of signatures to force a recall election.
Prior to the 2012 law, the elections commission only had to make a determination on the clarity of the petition language.
"They ruled whether it was clear enough to allow the officer in question to rebut the claims," said county Director of Elections Ed Golembiewski earlier this week.
Read Kestenbaum's compete statement about Act 417, the 2012 recall law, below:
The Michigan constitution sets up the basic process for recalls of public officials. Article II, Section 8, provides as follows:
Laws shall be enacted to provide for the recall of all electiveofficers except judges of courts of record upon petition ofelectors equal in number to 25 percent of the number ofpersons voting in the last preceding election for the officeof governor in the electoral district of the officer sought to berecalled. The sufficiency of any statement of reasons orgrounds procedurally required shall be a political rather thana judicial question.
For emphasis, I'll repeat that final sentence, in three parts
- The sufficiency of any statement of reasons or grounds,
- procedurally required,
- shall be a political rather than a judicial question.
In plain language, the people have the power to remove a politician from office. The submission of reasons for recall is a procedural, and not a substantive matter. And the targeted official may not impose delay by contesting whether those reasons for recall are "good enough".
When a citizen is aggrieved with a state or local elected official, he or she submits a text which outlines the reasons the official should be removed. The county election commission reviews this text for clarity. If the text meets this minimal standard, the petitioner may proceed to collect signatures to force a recall election.
However, late last year, the Legislature changed this process by enacting Act 417 of 2012.
Under the new law, the county election commission is also charged with determining whether the proposed reasons for recall are "factual".
Little guidance is offered for what constitutes factuality, and how the commission is supposed to decide this.
Presumably, the commission would have to take a position on the truth or falsity of the charges offered.
Moreover, Act 417 provides that, if the commission determines the reasons for recall to be "factual," the targeted officeholder may contest this finding in court, and prohibits the collection of signatures while the case is pending.
This new scheme flies in the face of the Constitution.
The sufficiency of reasons for recall is a political question. It is specifically not a judicial question.
If the election commission and the courts can determine the truth or falsity of reasons for recall, then the power to judge these questions has been removed from the people.
I conclude, therefore, that the new requirement of "factuality" in recall language is unconstitutional on its face.
I took an oath to uphold the state constitution. I cannot in good conscience follow this provision of Act 417, which directly contradicts that constitution.
Accordingly, as a member of the Washtenaw County Election Commission, I will continue to review proposed recall language only for clarity.
I respecfully decline to review any recall language for "factuality."
I will oppose any motion which purports to rule whether or not a proposed recall text is "factual".
The Election Commission is not a court. It should not hold evidentiary hearings or take testimony under oath on the issue of whether proposed recall language is "factual". I will oppose any attempt to do so.
The Washtenaw County Election Commission will meet at 1:00 pm today, Thursday, August 1, at the Board of Commissioners Room, 220 N. Main Street, Ann Arbor.
The main agenda item is the proposed recall of members of the Ann Arbor school board.
This is the first recall petition since the enactment of Act 417, and our first opportunity to respond to this new legal environment.
Washtenaw County Clerk & Register of Deeds
AnnArbor.com will be covering the recall hearing, which starts at 1 p.m. Check back later to see the results of the hearing.
Danielle Arndt covers K-12 education for AnnArbor.com. Follow her on Twitter @DanielleArndt or email her at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Ann Arbor Parents For Students
Mon, Aug 5, 2013 : 11:31 p.m.
Isn't failure to balance the budget factual?
Sat, Aug 3, 2013 : 3:40 p.m.
Kestenbaum is correct. A recall is a political question. Asking one elected official- the Clerk, in this case - to decide whether a political statement from another elected official or their opponent is true or not, is a road we do not want to go down.
Sat, Aug 3, 2013 : 12:06 p.m.
Incidentally, there's a Court of Appeals case that deals with this issue quite directly: Meyers v. Patchkowski, 216 MichApp 513 (1996).This case involved the proposed recall of school board members in Rogers City.The motion that petitioners complained of was later rescinded by the school board, and expunged from the minutes, and the school board members argued that it never happened.The county election commission found the recall language to be clear, and the board members took it to court.The circuit court agreed that the reasons were clear -- but then threw out the recall because the reasons were untrue.The Court of Appeals wrote as follows:"The circuit court exceeded its authority in invalidating the petitions. On ce the court decided that the recall petitions were clear, it should have concluded its review. The court did not have authority to review the statements in the petitions for truth or falsity. Such a determination is a political question for the voters, not the courts."This is exactly my point: truth or falsity is for the PEOPLE to decide.
Fri, Aug 2, 2013 : 3:53 p.m.
This is what happens when people in power start making laws and "do not", "can not", or "will not" understand what the State and Federal Constitution says in the first place. The first step is for them to read the Constitution themselves, something that many of our public officials do not even what taught to our children or in public schools.
Fri, Aug 2, 2013 : 3 p.m.
I agree with Mr. Kestenbaum's decision. The politicians are trying to put obsticles in the way of people trying to recall a representative. If enough signatures are obtained for the issue to be voted on then it should be placed before the voters to decide. That is how our democracy is supposed to work.
Fri, Aug 2, 2013 : 1:22 p.m.
I agree with Kestenbaum. This law is just another of the Lansing Republican bunch stuffing imperial laws down our throats then justifying their actions with a they know everything and we don't attitude. This continues to be sickening.
Fri, Aug 2, 2013 : 3:48 a.m.
I should like to post a number of things (hopefully the journalists at aa.com will not delete this post). 1. Larry K is a Very Thoughtful and Righteous dude, a Member of the State Bar of Michigan, yins all would enjoy having a cup of coffee with him. 2. The well-meaning Tea Party/Homeschoolers that filed the request did Not have the right language in their proposition. They can correct it by consulting with a lawyer. 3. This Is a Constitutional Question. Perhaps a lawyer can be found to challenge Larry K's. conclusion. I would Love to see that; my personal opinion is that Larry K is correct. "Let the Wild Rumpus begin!"
Fri, Aug 2, 2013 : 3:20 a.m.
I'm not a Kestenbaum fan and think he has overstepped his boundaries on several occasions. I agree with him on this occasion however. Good for him for not making a mockery of democracy.
Fri, Aug 2, 2013 : 2:09 a.m.
Friend Larry: Let me suggest another way of reading this, which might be implied by requiring that reasons be "factual." I would say this as saying the reasons cannot be counterfactual. For instance, if a politician were put up for recall for having committed adultery, but he or she was not married; or it it said they missed a meeting that they were in fact at, that should not be allowed in the language. Demonstrably false, not dependent on "opinion", counterfactual elements should not be allowed. A case in point, for instance, would be much of the language that has been attached to anti-gay recall efforts in Ypsilanti. Some of it was opinion, that should stay. But parts of such language that were demonstrably false should not be allowed.
Fri, Aug 2, 2013 : 1:35 p.m.
That would be my interpretation, as well, however, I am neither a lawyer, nor a clerk.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 9:45 p.m.
Can they pass a law that requires statements from candidates to be factual? If we had to have an election committee decide if a candidate was telling the truth about what they have done or will do before we could decide to vote for them we'd probably never get around to an election.I see where the legislature would want to protect a candidate against blatantly false accusations in order to affect a recall. But bringing that to the point of law is not easy and perhaps impossible. The law needs a different perspective.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 8:22 p.m.
I guess I always thought that the Office of the Clerk was a part of the Executive function and not the Judiciary interpretive function of Government. I learned something new today. Sounds like someone bypassed the AG's Office in the opinion department. I look forward to following the coming lawsuit.
Fri, Aug 2, 2013 : 11:37 a.m.
Bob, I'm not sure what good that would do. We already have a clerk, who I am assume took an oath to execute the duties of the office and to uphold the Constitution. Maybe Larry is just following the example of the Executive branch in Washington and simply ignoring governmental infrastructure. His interpretation of the law may well be correct, but I'm fairly certain that it is not for him to issue legal opinions. I just think it will be interesting to see where this goes.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 10:14 p.m.
feel free to run for clerk.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 7:44 p.m.
Tend to agree with Mick52. Get a legal opinion first. Maybe the AG.Clerk Kestenbaum is intelligent and well respected in Ann Arbor so I guess we wait for the next technolegal drama to unfold before this can go anywhere. Thurston rebels without a cause.While likely a clever procedural maneuver, it would seem more responsible to challenge the new law directly rather than risk losing the entire arguement simply by violating one's own elected duty. That's the law, Kesterbaum disobeyed, so out he goes for dereliction of his office duty. The law then remains and fails to get an "official" challenge?
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 8:15 p.m.
did you read the post from Kesterbaum?......if not you should
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 8:01 p.m.
Obviously I am a very slow composer.Question answered before able to post.So, I gusess we now wait for Da Judge..
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 7:16 p.m.
I see some questions about my authority to disregard a specific statute as invalid.First of all, anything an elected official does or doesn't do is subject to legal scrutiny and potential challenge. If my objection to following some law were not well founded, I expect that a judge would set me right rather quickly.Second, the courts exist to resolve disputes; if a law is unconstitutional on its face, it's not always necessary to resort to litigation.For example, until recently, Michigan law required clergy to be "a minister of the Gospel" to officiate at weddings. In other words, non-Christian clergy were barred from marrying people.We county clerks all ignored that requirement, without needing a judge to tell us so.(Recently, the law was finally amended to remove the discriminatory language.)
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 10:01 p.m.
fyi, I was being sarcastic and facetious in my comment above.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 7:09 p.m.
A lawsuit in the making, nice job Mr. Kestenbaum.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 11:34 p.m.
To DonBee, It's usually better to get clarity on something that is written ambiguously, for everyone's sake. ----Mrs. Huffman
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 9:57 p.m.
Ms. Huffman -I don't have an opinion on good or bad, only that if the ruling had been required, then this could have been the test case for the position that Mr. Kestenbaum took. Mr. Kestenbaum is his own person and decides what he wants to do. Putting out a public opinion piece like this is like throwing down the gauntlet in the time of knights, it was a challenge, and challenges today are not met with steel but with lawyers. Not may public officials have the guts to potentially start a test case.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 7:13 p.m.
I think Larry Kestenbaum makes a good argument.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 6:50 p.m.
Thank you for clarity and reason LK!
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 6:48 p.m.
Here's the sad fact we've been living under the rule of the benevolent repubs........"Facts don't matter,",,, when the very intention is to impose barriers, roadblocks and burdens that thwarts the will of the people or the law.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 6:28 p.m.
Now might be the time to file for a writ of mandamus
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 6:25 p.m.
Sat, Aug 3, 2013 : 5:57 a.m.
Really? For discussing what part of the law is in his opinion, against the Michigan Constitution? He is the County Clerk and that's his job. No recall necessary or desired.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 5:56 p.m.
Completely agree with Larry Kestenbaum.The State Constitution deems the recall grounds a non-reviewable "political question" and the Michigan Legislature cannot override this.Without such protections, you are going to have to hold hearings on fact issues to be decided by the Elections Commission.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 5:42 p.m.
I think Mr. Kestenbaum's first duty should have been to seek an opinion on this from the state Attorney General's office.Also this sentence from the state constitution: "Laws shall be enacted to provide for the recall of all elective officers except judges of courts of record upon petition of electors equal in number to 25 percent of the number of persons voting in the last preceding election for the office of governor in the electoral district of the officer sought to be recalled."seems to indicate that the constitution gives the legislature leeway to make law on how recalls can be conducted. So why wouldn't the new law be protected by that language? I kind of like the idea that reasons for recall are factual and not made up.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 6:14 p.m.
The sentence you quote from the constitution is immediately followed by another sentence, as part of the same paragraph, which you conveniently chose to omit:"The sufficiency of any statement of reasons or grounds procedurally required shall be a political rather than a judicial question."This sentence means exactly what Kestenbaum says it means: that reasons for recall are a matter of politics rather than a matter of substance/"factuality." The law passed last year directly contradicts this language in the state constitution ... and is therefore unconstitutional.Kudos to Kestenbaum for taking this position.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 5:55 p.m.
"I kind of like the idea that reasons for recall are factual and not made up."Recalls are fundamentally subjective.This law is just a power grab from the people, attempting to undermine the recall process, and tie up any recall in the courts over verbal quibbling.Just as they tried to use the font size to undermine the rights of voters.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 5:41 p.m.
I shall now issue a statement listing the laws that I consider to be unconstitutional and that I will, therefore, no longer follow. Seriously, why does he get to decide which laws he will and will not follow? Why can't the rest of us do that, too?
Fri, Aug 2, 2013 : 1:16 p.m.
@Are you serious? BINGO!
Are you serious?
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 7:29 p.m.
"I shall now issue a statement listing the laws that I consider to be unconstitutional and that I will, therefore, no longer follow."Go right ahead. Just be prepared to suffer the consequences if you lose. That is exactly what LK is doing.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 6:58 p.m.
Until a judge rules that the law is unconstitutional, the law is still the law, and the clerk should follow the law. If he wants to act like a judge, he should run for that office. Some clerk saying the law is unconstitutional doesn't mean diddly squat.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 6:27 p.m.
"When did we decide that county clerks can decide on the constitutionality of laws?"When we required them to take an oath to uphold the Constitution.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 5:57 p.m.
When did we decide that county clerks can decide on the constitutionality of laws? I think I missed that lesson when I was back in school.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 5:51 p.m.
Because you are not the County Clerk.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 5:32 p.m.
County Clerk Kestenbaum has it right. Otherwise King George would still have US in court substantiating factuality in the Declaration.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 5:32 p.m.
I noticed the ambiguity over these new requirements. In the past we have seen recall petitions denied based on absurd interpretations of the text. The "factual" stuff is for the voters to decide. Putting that determination in anyone else's hands denies the voters of their rightful role in making that determination.Glad to see Kestenbaum leading on this.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 10:05 p.m.
we've also seen absurd petitions circulated without a speck of truth, but they were clear enough for all the straight ticket voters to cast a ballot.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 5:20 p.m.
Interesting. I have respect for LK and his work with the County. However, when Obama does these things, I always express disagreement, because it seems to me that It's the court's role to decide on Constitutionality. But then, by doing this, perhaps he will cause the question to taken to the court, where it will be decided. The thing is that with Obama, he is almost never questioned on it and he gets away with it because we no longer have an objective media. I think the only exception is his bogus NLRB "recess appointments" episode that is moving along, though at a snail's pace.
Fri, Aug 2, 2013 : 10:38 a.m.
The recess appointments issue related to whether the Senate was "in session" when so many members were away for the holidays that it couldn't conduct business. Neither what constitutes "in session" nor whether 41 Senators can prevent a vote on a president's appointments is mentioned in the Constitution.
Fri, Aug 2, 2013 : 3:17 a.m.
Usual Suspect. As usual you ignore the fact this NLRB appointment during recess has been practiced and accepted by REPUBLICAN Presidents without challenge in the past. You are misinformed and selective in your evidence.I take issue with the NLRB filing suit against a private company like Boeing when they wanted to move a union labor locked plant to a non union and more productive state so they could increase production and profits. That my tax dollars are being spent to protect union (read that as being "special interest", is appalling to me and an affront to free enterprise and democracy.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 5:45 p.m.
"... it seems to me that It's the court's role to decide on Constitutionality"Ultimately, yes, it is the Court's role. But the Court cannot step into a situation and rule something constitutional or not - the case needs to be brought to them. When an executive refuses to carry out a law he deems unconstitutional, he is taking the first, highly appropriate, step in the process which will bring the matter to the Court for its final adjudication.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 5:33 p.m.
Thanks, seldon. If it were actually an unrelated rant, your thoughts might some sense. The issue is an elected official deciding not to follow the rule of law because he thinks it's unconstitutional. LK is doing that here, and Obama has done it himself several times. The tie between them was in the relating of my reaction to each of them. I'm not sure why you're going on a rant about somebody's comments on this article.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 5:29 p.m.
Additionally..... the language on recall petitions is often opinion, not something that can be measured against some benchmark of accuracy. For example, in this case, "Failure to demonstrate thoughtful consideration of constituent priorities." It's pretty hard to rule on whether an opinion is "factual." That's pretty much what the voters would be expressing in the recall election, should it come that.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 5:27 p.m.
Kestenbaum isn't Obama, so I'm not sure why you're going on an unrelated rant here.
Thu, Aug 1, 2013 : 5:19 p.m.
Kestenbaum's argument seems to be a sound one. I wonder what the other Election Commissioners - and the County's lawyers - will make of it.
Petition language (reasons for recall) must be submitted on approved recall petition form (city/township form). This form is used for all recall candidates, including school board members (the heading must identify the office of school board member).How many signatures do you need to recall a governor? ›
(d) The appropriate number of valid signatures: The minimum number of proponents listed on the notice of intention is 50, or equal to five times the number of signatures required to have been filed on the nomination paper of the officer sought to be recalled, whichever is higher.Does Michigan have recall elections? ›
The Michigan Election Law states that each reason for the recall “shall be based upon the officer's conduct during his or her current term in office.”What is the process of a recall? ›
A recall election (also called a recall referendum, recall petition or representative recall) is a procedure by which, in certain polities, voters can remove an elected official from office through a referendum before that official's term of office has ended.What can cause a board member to be removed? ›
- The board member has not completed their basic responsibilities (through negligence or blatant recklessness). ...
- The board member has violated policies of the organization or acted unethically or criminally. ...
- The board member is ready to roll off the board voluntarily.
A successful recall petition removes the candidate from their term of office, so the recalled candidate may not file for any special election to fill the remainder of their term.What is a constitutional initiative? ›
An initiated constitutional amendment is an amendment to a state's constitution that results from petitioning by a state's citizens. By utilizing this initiative process, citizens can propose and vote on constitutional amendments directly, without need of legislative referral.What states allow recall elections? ›
According to a recent report by the National Conference of State Legislatures, 18 states currently permit recall of state officials: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin.What is MRA Michigan recall? ›
The MRA issues a recall on any marijuana tested by Viridis between Aug. 10, 2021 and Nov. 16, 2021, calling the Viridis safety testing results unreliable or inaccurate. The MRA issues a list of 400-plus marijuana retailers that were in possession of the recalled marijuana.What does Michigan Constitution say about voting? ›
Sec. 4. (1) Every citizen of the United States who is an elector qualified to vote in Michigan shall have the following rights: (a) The fundamental right to vote, including but not limited to the right, once registered, to vote a secret ballot in all elections.
Article II of the California Constitution, approved by California voters in 1911, allows people to recall and remove elected officials and justices of the State Supreme Court from office.What are the 2 types of recall? ›
There are three main types of recall: free recall, cued recall and serial recall. Psychologists test these forms of recall as a way to study the memory processes of humans and animals.What are the three levels of recall? ›
While both the FDA and USDA have their own definitions of product recall classes, they follow the same general rule – 1= most serious / dangerous, 2= potentially dangerous and 3 = least dangerous.What is a silent recall? ›
Ever heard of a silent recall? You probably have not—and that's because these are repairs that manufacturers do to products only if a customer complains about the problem. Even though the manufacturer is aware of the defect, they won't repair it unless the consumer complains.What is inappropriate behavior of a board member? ›
refusing to accept or complete tasks. failing to disclose conflicts of interest. monopolizing board discussions, or simply not participating in the conversation at all. behavior disrespectfully toward the board president and other members.What is unethical behavior of board of directors? ›
Overseeing investments. Failure to set reasonable compensation for the executive director and to review their performance. Micromanaging staff rather than leading by planning, strategizing and overseeing staff.How do you punish a board member? ›
Boards can also discipline a member by reprimanding that member during the meeting or having it noted in the meeting minutes that the board does not agree with what that member is doing.What board members should not do? ›
- Failing to Understand Fiduciary Duties.
- Failing to Provide Effective Oversight.
- Deference to the Executive Committee, Board Chair, or the Organization's Founder.
- Micro-managing Staff.
- Avoiding The Hard Questions.
- Insufficient Conflict Management.
- Lack of Awareness of Laws Governing Tax-Exempts.
Passed by Congress on May 13, 1912, and ratified on April 8, 1913, the 17th Amendment modified Article I, Section 3, of the Constitution by allowing voters to cast direct votes for U.S. senators. Prior to its passage, senators were chosen by state legislatures.What are two things that can get an elected official removed from office? ›
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
The Lieutenant Governor shall become Governor upon the death, resignation, or removal from office of the Governor.What is a constitutional challenge to a law? ›
The Supreme Court often is called on to rule on the constitutionality of statutes adopted by the legislature. A person who brings a constitutional challenge faces a difficult legal burden. Laws are presumed to be constitutional unless a clear violation of a specific provision of the Constitution can be proven.What are my constitutional rights? ›
The Bill of Rights
First Amendment: Freedom of religion, freedom of speech and the press, the right to assemble, the right to petition government. Second Amendment: The right to form a militia and to keep and bear arms. Third Amendment: The right not to have soldiers in one's home.
A person wishing to challenge the constitutionality of a law that regulates their conduct typically may sue the government official responsible for enforcing that provision for declaratory and injunctive relief pursuant to Ex parte Young.What are the grounds for recall? ›
The grounds for recall are (1) lack of fitness, (2) incompetence, (3) neglect of duties, or (4) corruption.What does the Constitution say about states controlling elections? ›
Article 1, Section 4 of the Constitution explains that the States have the primary authority over election administration, the "times, places, and manner of holding elections".What percentage of the votes cast in the previous election is required to cause a recall election? ›
State Officer Recalls in General
Signatures from at least 5 counties must each equal 1 percent of the total number of votes cast in the last election for Governor in the county. (Cal. Const., art.
Michigan Retailers Association (MRA) is the unified voice of Michigan's retail industry and a trusted resource for all types of businesses. Michigan retailers provide more than 870,000 jobs to Michigan workers and are responsible for 20% of Michigan's total economic activity.What is the 5th Amendment of the Michigan Constitution? ›
§ 5 Freedom of speech and of press.
Every person may freely speak, write, express and publish his views on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of such right; and no law shall be enacted to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press.
In the U.S., no one is required by law to vote in any local, state, or presidential election.
Twenty-Sixth Amendment Section 1: The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on a. . .Can you answer I don't recall in court? ›
"I don't recall" is often the most truthful answer if you're not sure. Then if the document shows up, it may refresh your memory, but it doesn't contradict your sworn testimony.What is unethical behavior for a judge? ›
Some examples of judicial misconduct are rude, abusive, and improper treatment of lawyers, litigants, witnesses, jurors, court staff or others, failure to disqualify when the law requires, receipt of information about a case outside the presence of one party, abuse of contempt or sanctions, and delay in decision-making ...Is it OK to say I don't recall in court? ›
Any time you provide testimony in a criminal case (yours or someone else's) under oath, whether it's verbally or in writing, you're required to tell the truth. If you don't, you could potentially face perjury charges.What is a Type 1 recall? ›
Class I - a situation in which there is a reasonable probability that the use of, or exposure to, a violative product will cause serious adverse health consequences or death.What is an example of a Class 3 recall? ›
Class III recall: involves products that are unlikely to cause any adverse health reaction, but that violate FDA labeling or manufacturing laws. Examples include: a minor container defect or lack of English labeling in a retail food.Which class of recall is the least serious? ›
Class III recalls are the least serious of the three types of FDA recalls. Class III recalls apply to minor product defects or errors that are unlikely to cause harm to someone's health.What is the active recall rule? ›
Active recall is a type of retrieval practice where you actively try to remember something that you have learned. This can be done in a number of ways, but the most common is by testing yourself on the material. This could be through writing out answers to questions, verbally answering questions, or using flashcards.What is the most common type of recall? ›
 The top recall causes are incorrect labeling, defective products, and incorrect potency. Common examples of contaminants that cause drug recalls were other drugs, heavy metals, bacteria, or fungi.What is a Class 1 and Class 2 recall? ›
Class I: Recalls for products that could cause serious injury or death; Class II: Recalls for products that might cause serious injury or temporary illness; Class III: Recalls for products that are unlikely to cause injury or illness, but violate FDA regulations.
There are three recall status types that might display after you look up a VIN for safety recalls: Recall INCOMPLETE - This means that an incomplete or "open" recall was found on the car and the owner should follow the remedy instructions. Recall INCOMPLETE.What is mental recall? ›
recall, in psychology, the act of retrieving information or events from the past while lacking a specific cue to help in retrieving the information. A person employs recall, for example, when reminiscing about a vacation or reciting a poem after hearing its title.What is involuntary recall? ›
When the FDA finds a flaw, potential hazard, or serious side effect in a medicine, they have the power to request a recall. A recall is a government issued request to retract a batch or entirely stop production of a defective product, specifically medication.How do you remove a school board member in Michigan? ›
Sec. 1107. (1) The governor may remove a member of a school board from office under this section if the governor is satisfied from the evidence submitted to the governor that the member is guilty of gross neglect of duty, corrupt conduct in office, or any other misfeasance or malfeasance in office.How do I remove someone from an advisory board? ›
A board of directors can vote to remove a director through a majority vote or ordinary resolution. While the board of directors cannot directly remove the director, the outcome of the vote can be used to start the process.How long is a school board members term in Michigan? ›
For example, California and Michigan school board members serve four-year terms. Other states, including Texas and Florida, have terms of two or three years.Can board members remove another board member? ›
Many governing documents provide that an officer may be removed by a majority vote of the board members, but that an elected board member may only be removed with a vote of the association membership.How do you get a board member to step down? ›
- Include Leadership. The discussion should include the chairman of the board and at least one member of the executive committee. ...
- Highlight Specific Things. ...
- Explain the Positive Impact for the Organization. ...
- Refer to Member Policies.
Generally, you must have a concrete reason for excluding a director. If you have an issue with efficiency, it might be worth establishing an Executive Committee. This is a smaller group that can deal with immediate concerns.What is a toxic board member? ›
Toxic board members prevent the board of directors from performing their fiduciary duty for the community by creating unnecessary distractions. Because they often involve extraneous issues unrelated to the goals of the community, the results can impede the board's decision-making process.”
Advisory boards do not have any legal powers compared to boards of directors who have full authority over corporate matters such as appointing executives and shareholders voting rights on major decisions like M&A proposals. The roles and responsibilities of each type of body depend on their purpose.What power does an advisory board have? ›
The role of an advisory board is not to make decisions, but rather to provide current knowledge, critical thinking and analysis to increase the confidence of the decision-makers who represent the company. An advisory board is different to a governance board or board of directors.Do advisory boards have authority? ›
An advisory board has no governing power or fiduciary responsibility. They simply offer opinions. That thought leadership, however, can have a powerful impact on a nonprofit's perception. Often, advisory boards focus on specific areas of nonprofit needs or ambassadorship.How much do school board members get paid in Michigan? ›
As of Jun 14, 2023, the average annual pay for a School Board in Dearborn is $61,292 a year.What is the average age of board members? ›
According to Bloomberg ESG data, the average age of board members at Russell 1000 companies dropped to 61.8 years through Oct. 2022, down from a high of 62.5 years in 2019.Do you get paid to be on school board in Michigan? ›
A board member shall not receive compensation for more than a total of 52 meetings, subcommittee meetings, and authorized duties per year unless the majority of the board votes to remove this limitation.