It was proved that they committed fraud, but that's OK because you can vote against it later? Does that make any sense?
DETROIT (AP) — A federal judge on Tuesday allowed an anti-affirmative-action proposal to go before Michigan voters, rejecting arguments that it won a place on the November ballot through widespread, racially targeted fraud.
U.S. District Judge Arthur Tarnow, in a 34-page ruling, said opponents proved the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative "committed voter fraud in obtaining signatures in support of the petition." But they did not prove the MCRI violated the federal Voting Rights Act by depriving minorities of equal access to the political process, he said.
The MCRI seeks to ban race and gender preferences in government hiring and public-university admissions in Michigan. Lawyers representing the MCRI and state elections officials told Tarnow last month that Michigan residents would be harmed if they were not allowed to vote on the issue.
Opponents said the MCRI misrepresented the referendum's ultimate aims while petitioning to put the issue on the ballot. Witnesses told Tarnow they were tricked into signing or collecting signatures on petitions circulated by the MCRI.
Tarnow wrote that "voters who were induced by fraud into signing the petition still have an opportunity to participate in the political process by voting against the proposal in the general election."
I guess I can see where the judge is coming from on this specific law- but I think it proves that we need to tighten up the ballot proposal laws.