Arbor Update

Ann Arbor Area Community News

BAMN Leader: “Court order, shmourt order”

8. January 2006 • Ari Paul
Email this article

The Michigan Daily says there is still a dispute over the language of the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative:

With the proposal to ban some affirmative action programs already a lock for this November’s state ballot, the State Board of Canvassers has one final chance to settle a dispute over the language.

The Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, the group sponsoring the proposal, and BAMN, which opposes it, are still arguing over whether the initiative’s language is misleading.

BAMN also claims that the MCRI committed fraud when gathering signatures.

  1. Hey, it rhymes.
       —David Boyle    Jan. 8 '06 - 08:30PM    #
  2. BAMN has a point.

    Frankly I appreciate their anger. I’m sick of these soft “reform groups” that don’t really put up an inch of resistance. Where are Students Supporting Affirmative Action’s lawyers? Why is BAMN the only group taking legal action?

    The table incident aside, it’s BAMN that has lawyers challenging the MCRI at every step.

    The University lawyers were no help (

    If more moderate groups are going to support affirmative action, they should be challenging the MCRI on legal grounds as well.
       —Adam    Jan. 9 '06 - 06:16AM    #
  3. Adam,

    First, I take it you’ve never been to court or you would understand that getting into this kind of legal battle is expensive. Presumably, most groups opposed to MCRI realize that it’s going to be on the ballot and are marshalling their resources for the ballot battle. Who’s bankrolling BAMNs legal fees?

    Second, I will be voting against the MCRI and think it will be another strike against Michigan if it passes. But I think BAMNs actions have been a complete disaster, playing right into the hands of the proponents of MCRI. BAMN has failed completely on its legal attack and only managed to alienate opponents of MCRI.

    Third, what legal argument is there against MCRI getting on the ballot? That they lied to people about what was on the petitions? Sorry, unless you can show proof that the petitions themselves were fraudulent, I don’t think you have a case. Frankly, I’m more upset with the people who signed the petitions without bothering to read or understand what they were signing. To claim now that they were duped just makes them look foolish.
       —John Q.    Jan. 9 '06 - 06:36AM    #
  4. Funny how the folks always arguing for broad, socialist systems are the same ones arguing that the common people were duped again…
    It’s why we need democratic centralism, Comrade.
       —js    Jan. 9 '06 - 10:07PM    #