Help! Absentee Ballot.

[muscleman]

Just received my absentee ballot.  Who are advocates for medical marijuana?  Who are our enemies?  I live in Oakland County.  I am in the township of Oxford.

 

I travel a lot and haven't kept up on the politics of Medical Marijuana.  If anyone can recommend good judges, I'd appreciate that too.

 

Thank you.

Edited September 30, 2014 by muscleman

[Wild Bill]

I'd be particularly interested in info on the judicial candidates.

[Habenero]

Oakland county? Straight ticket Dem and research your local judges.

[+Malamute]

Oakland county is too general.  more specific.

[Habenero]

Right. Where u at in Jokeland county? You got different district court judges depending where u are. Also commissioners, etc. But when in doubt in Jokeland county vote dem.

[muscleman]

Oxford

[t-pain]

the problem with judges is the gentlemen never answer a question because 'the issue could come before them' if they are picked, and then they would have bias.

 

so for judges you really dont know. the only true way is to google their name with "medical marijuana" , or talk to a few criminal defense atty who can tell you whos who.

[Habenero]

Every1 has bias. Giving your position on medical marijuana doesn't give u bias.

[t-pain]

you can tell that to judge somers.

http://www.examiner.com/article/appeals-court-upholds-removal-of-judge-opposed-to-mi-medical-marijuana-act

 

During a December 21, 2011, hearing conducted by Judge Somers on a motion for his disqualification, Mr. Navoy's defense attorney, Neil Rockind, argued that: “I have seen very few sitting judges who have chosen to sit down for interviews to talk about a particular act. To me it is almost unconscionable. I can't, for the life of me, understand how a judge, who is likely to have cases who will come before him or her of the variety of the sort and maybe even that will touch upon the subject, that is going to be the subject of the interviewer, that a judge would actually sit down and have a discussion. It is revealing. The decision to actually sit down, the choice to grant the interview, the choice to take part in the conversation, the choice to publicly talk about your feelings about the Medical Marijuana Act, its implications, its consequences, whether you talk about it in the form of a case, opinions that you've reached or just personally feelings that you have or even observations of the impact of the Medical Marijuana Act in your opinion and how it has impacted the communities and others. The choice, I think, was a very bad one. What I think that choice did, Judge Somers, was it communicated to members of the public, it certainly resonated with me, that you have personal feelings about, either marijuana, or more importantly the Medical Marijuana Act, that … actually interfere with, your ability to decide these cases fairly… I would fear that there was a great risk of your impartiality being compromised.”

thats right from mr rockind, one of the top mmj lawyers here in michigan.

 

judges cannot give their opinions on laws.

at least thats the reply i got from a bunch of judge candidates last time i emailed a bunch of them in the last election.

Edited September 30, 2014 by t-pain

[Habenero]

A position on medical marijuana ain't an opinion on a law. It's a position on a social issue. No one said they need to give an opinion on whether a law is good or bad. If it's a catholic judge they're probably against abortion personally but as a judge they respect the fact that it ain't against the law. A judge is supposed to uphold the law not decide if it's a bad law. So yeah, like I already said above giving your position on medical marijuana isn't the same as giving an opinion on the law itself. Don't be so marrow minded a judge can give personal opinions on social issues without giving an opinion on a law bro.