553
Comments (57)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
8
Chainsaw 8 points ago +8 / -0

I hope so and this isn't a "We'll fix it for the next time" thing. The online doc doesn't say anything specific about it.

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2021/related/proposals/ar3

6
pizza_lawyer 6 points ago +6 / -0

Yeah I read it and totally agree. The last line states that the WI Legislators shall:

"redress to these and other election law violations and failed administrative procedures as its highest priority and shall take up legislation crafted to ensure civil officers follow the laws as written."

Could mean fix it next time...or could be de-certify, but why not spell it out? This is why people hate lawyers and politicians.

2
illmatic_diplomat 2 points ago +2 / -0

Agree to your point and question asked on clarity and all that. However does page (1) lines (1) (13) (14) and page (2) lines (1) (2); Help confirm what their intent is to address and uphold by the letter of law?

2
pizza_lawyer 2 points ago +2 / -0

Good points. It might clarify a little, but plain language is much better. Resolution simply should have stated what went wrong (they did do this), then explain exactly how they will fix it (that's the unclear part imo.) Will they de-certify or will they make violations of the law a crime or something? I guess we will find out!

2
illmatic_diplomat 2 points ago +2 / -0

To me it’s all focused on a “remedy” to the 2020 presidential election results. So to our earlier point, just what the heck is “remedy” in relation to the letter of the law actually mean? My guess this is where some have jumped to the conclusion this is what legally would mean a decertification should Pence kick it back to the slate electors...(?) I guess we’ll just have to see