Writ of Mandamus
Uploaded by
Clickon DetroitWrit of Mandamus
Uploaded by
Clickon DetroitFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE September 1, 2022
Contact: Darci McConnell at darci@mireprofreedom.org or 313.686.8094
REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS GROUP ASKS SUPREME COURT TO DIRECT BOARD TO PUT
PROPOSAL 3 ON BALLOT
DETROIT, MI — Attorneys for Reproductive Freedom for All (RFFA) filed an emergency writ of
mandamus today, Thursday, Sept. 1, 2022, asking the Michigan Supreme Court for judicial
intervention to force the Board of State Canvassers to certify its proposal that seeks to protect
abortion rights for the November ballot.
“The board’s job was to certify whether we met the signature threshold to get on the ballot,”
RFFA attorney Steve Liedel said after the board deadlocked on the issue Wednesday. “Clearly,
we met and exceeded the state’s threshold by more than 140,000 signatures. By not certifying,
the board disenfranchised the more than 730,000 Michigan voters who read, understood, and
signed these petitions.”
In his filing, Liedel said “the law is clear,” regarding the duty of the Board of State Canvassers
and it failed to do its job Wednesday when a 2-2 deadlock prevented certification of the
measure for the Nov. 8 election. Liedel requested an expedited decision by Sept. 7, ahead of a
Sept. 9 deadline to provide enough time for clerks to print ballots for voters.
The Bureau of Elections determined that RFFA submitted 596,379 valid signatures, well above
the 425,059 necessary for certification.
“The Board’s refusal to certify the RFFA petition as sufficient violates the Michigan Constitution
of 1963 and Michigan Election Law. RFFA therefore respectfully asks that this Court order (1)
the Board to certify RFFA’s petition as sufficient, and (2) the Secretary of State to include the
RFFA proposal with the designation as Proposal 22-3, on the November ballot,” the filing reads.
The measure would restore abortion rights that were lost when the U.S. Supreme Court
overturned Roe v. Wade and gave oversight to the states. In Michigan, that would mean
reverting to a 1931 law that criminalizes abortion, even in cases of rape and incest.
Separately, the board approved on Wednesday the proposal’s ballot summary language, which
will appear on the ballot as Proposal 3 if the Michigan Supreme Court vacates its ruling.
Among those who spoke at Wednesday’s meeting was Dr. Gregory Goyert, who said that a
return to the 1931 law “means that our patients will receive substandard care, experience
increased severe maternal morbidity, and suffer increased risk of maternal death.”