A Michigan county judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Michigan Republican Party and Republican National Committee complaining the city of Flint didn’t hire enough GOP election inspectors.
On the surface, they might have a good case on the merits. State law requires election administrators to hire an “equal number as nearly as possible” of Republican and Democratic election inspectors. Only 120 of Flint’s 682 election inspectors are Republicans.
But it’s not that simple. A good case isn’t enough. Before a court can rule on the merits, the parties must have standing, the lawsuit must be filed in the proper venue, and the court must have subject matter jurisdiction. And standing precedes jurisdiction.
Raw Story says (here) the city argued the MRP and RNC “lacked legal standing, as state law specifies only major party county chairs can challenge the appointment of election inspectors through a specified process,” and the judge dismissed their lawsuit for this reason. The state party announced they’ll appeal. If they do, they’ll lose.
“This is unacceptable,” an MRP spokesman said, referring to the unequal ratio of election inspectors. It’s also irrelevant. The only issue before the courts is whether the plaintiffs have standing, and under Michigan law, they don’t. If they want their arguments heard, they have to get the GOP county chair to sue.
Which raises this question: Are they having a problem with their local party boss?