MICHIGAN ELECTION LAW
Act 116 of 1954
168.590 Qualifying petition; filing; filing fee in lieu of petition prohibited; qualifications.
Sec. 590.
(1) For the purposes of this act, "qualifying petition" means a nominating petition required of and filed by a person to qualify to appear on an election ballot as a candidate for office without political party affiliation.
(2) A person may file a qualifying petition for a partisan office or office of justice of the supreme court. A filing fee shall not be tendered instead of a qualifying petition.
(3) A person filing a qualifying petition shall meet the qualifications prescribed by law to hold the office.
History: Add. 1988, Act 116, Imd. Eff. May 2, 1988
Compiler's Notes:
Section 2 of Act 116 of 1988 provides:
“If any portion of this amendatory act or the application of this amendatory act to any person or circumstances shall be found to be invalid by a court, the invalidity shall not affect the remaining portions or applications of this amendatory act which can be given effect without the invalid portion or application, if the remaining portions are not determined by the court to be inoperable, and to this end this amendatory act is declared to be severable.”
PopularName Notes:
Election Code
Notes of Decisions
Deleeuw v. Bd. of State Canvassers, 688 N.W.2d 847 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 4× “Nad *500 er’s qualifying petition could not include the signatures filed by Deleeuw because under MCL 168.590 the candidate must file the petition, and alleging that a substantial number of the signatures had been obtained in violation of Michigan election law.”
Martin v. Sec'y of State, 760 N.W.2d 726 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “Rather, the Deleeuw Court determined that a party who was not formally affiliated with an election campaign, yet was collecting signatures to get a candidate's name on the ballot, had standing pursuant to MCL 168.590(3) to seek a mandamus action asking this Court to compel the…”
Libertarian Party v. Johnson, 905 F. Supp. 2d 751 (E.D. Mich. 2012).
· cites it 2× “MCL § 168.590 to 168.590h. C. The Michigan Sore Loser Statute is not Unconstitutional Either Facially or as Applied to Gary Johnson The Supreme Court’s decision in Storer, supra, goes a long way toward confirming the constitutionality of the Michigan sore loser statute as…”
Michigan Civil Rights Initiative v. Bd. of State Canvassers, 708 N.W.2d 139 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006).
“The signatures for the petition were collected by members and officials of the Republican Party, and the Michigan Democratic Party Chairman filed a challenge to the petition, asserting, among other things, that Nader’s qualifying petition could not include the signatures filed…”
Rosa Holliday v. Sec'y of State (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 4× “As explained previously, in Michigan, West and Abdullah are seeking placement on the ballot as independent candidates via the qualifying petition method of nomination provided by MCL 168.590 et seq., which is chapter XXIVA of the Michigan Election Law.”
Graveline v. Johnson (E.D. Mich. 2019).
· cites it 2× “” Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 168.590 (1), 168.590c(2) (2008).”
Rosa Holliday v. Bd. of State Canvassers (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
“” See MCL 168.590(1). In other words, although “qualifying petitions” are not necessarily the same thing as “nominating petitions” under Michigan election law, as used in this opinion, the two phrases are functionally synonymous.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 168.590(1) — 2 cases
Rosa Holliday v. Sec'y of State (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
“As explained previously, in Michigan, West and Abdullah are seeking placement on the ballot as independent candidates via the qualifying petition method of nomination provided by MCL 168.590 et seq., which is chapter XXIVA of the Michigan Election Law.”
Rosa Holliday v. Bd. of State Canvassers (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
“” See MCL 168.590(1). In other words, although “qualifying petitions” are not necessarily the same thing as “nominating petitions” under Michigan election law, as used in this opinion, the two phrases are functionally synonymous.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 168.590(3) — 2 cases
Martin v. Sec'y of State, 760 N.W.2d 726 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008).
“Rather, the Deleeuw Court determined that a party who was not formally affiliated with an election campaign, yet was collecting signatures to get a candidate's name on the ballot, had standing pursuant to MCL 168.590(3) to seek a mandamus action asking this Court to compel the…”
Deleeuw v. Bd. of State Canvassers, 688 N.W.2d 847 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
“Nad *500 er’s qualifying petition could not include the signatures filed by Deleeuw because under MCL 168.590 the candidate must file the petition, and alleging that a substantial number of the signatures had been obtained in violation of Michigan election law.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.