Pontiac Mayoral Candidate's Conviction Raises Questions About Eligibility for Office Under Kwame-Inspired Ban
A Wayne County Circuit Court emergency motion has been filed by a lifelong Pontiac resident, challenging the eligibility of mayoral candidate Michael McGuinness to run for office under a state constitutional amendment inspired by former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick's corruption scandal. The motion questions whether McGuinness' past felony convictions bar him from seeking public office.
McGuinness served as chairman of the Oakland County Democratic Party during the 2010 campaign cycle, when he became involved in an election-fraud scheme. He was accused of forging documents and placing three Tea Party candidates on the ballot under a third party to mislead voters and draw votes away from Republicans in several local races. In 2011, McGuinness was convicted of uttering and publishing and perjury in connection with the case and sentenced to probation, community service, and a $1,000 fine.
A state constitutional amendment adopted in 2010, following public outrage over political corruption, prohibits former public officials convicted of a felony involving "dishonesty, deceit, fraud, or breach of the public trust" from holding elected office or a high-level public job for 20 years. Michigan voters overwhelmingly approved the measure as a response to Kilpatrick's corruption scandal.
Now, activist Marcus Kelley has submitted a motion asking a judge to determine whether McGuinness is eligible to run for office under this ban. The motion argues that the unsealing of McGuinness' court records could reveal critical details about his conviction and its impact on his eligibility to hold public office.
Kelley's filing cites the public interest in knowing the underlying details of McGuinness' conviction, particularly given the severity of his offenses, which involved attempting to affect the outcome of an election. Attorney Todd Russell Perkins, who represents Kelley, emphasizes that this is not a personal attack on McGuinness but rather a concern for public integrity and transparency.
Perkins notes that it remains unclear whether serving as a political party chair qualifies as holding a position in local, state, or federal government under the amendment. The motion seeks to shed light on this issue, and Kelley has indicated his intention to seek further legal action depending on what is revealed from McGuinness' court records.
A Wayne County Circuit Court emergency motion has been filed by a lifelong Pontiac resident, challenging the eligibility of mayoral candidate Michael McGuinness to run for office under a state constitutional amendment inspired by former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick's corruption scandal. The motion questions whether McGuinness' past felony convictions bar him from seeking public office.
McGuinness served as chairman of the Oakland County Democratic Party during the 2010 campaign cycle, when he became involved in an election-fraud scheme. He was accused of forging documents and placing three Tea Party candidates on the ballot under a third party to mislead voters and draw votes away from Republicans in several local races. In 2011, McGuinness was convicted of uttering and publishing and perjury in connection with the case and sentenced to probation, community service, and a $1,000 fine.
A state constitutional amendment adopted in 2010, following public outrage over political corruption, prohibits former public officials convicted of a felony involving "dishonesty, deceit, fraud, or breach of the public trust" from holding elected office or a high-level public job for 20 years. Michigan voters overwhelmingly approved the measure as a response to Kilpatrick's corruption scandal.
Now, activist Marcus Kelley has submitted a motion asking a judge to determine whether McGuinness is eligible to run for office under this ban. The motion argues that the unsealing of McGuinness' court records could reveal critical details about his conviction and its impact on his eligibility to hold public office.
Kelley's filing cites the public interest in knowing the underlying details of McGuinness' conviction, particularly given the severity of his offenses, which involved attempting to affect the outcome of an election. Attorney Todd Russell Perkins, who represents Kelley, emphasizes that this is not a personal attack on McGuinness but rather a concern for public integrity and transparency.
Perkins notes that it remains unclear whether serving as a political party chair qualifies as holding a position in local, state, or federal government under the amendment. The motion seeks to shed light on this issue, and Kelley has indicated his intention to seek further legal action depending on what is revealed from McGuinness' court records.
This whole thing with Michael McGuinness and the mayoral candidate thing is super weird 
. I mean, he got in some pretty shady stuff back in 2010, like forging documents and trying to pull off an election-fraud scheme 
. And now he's trying to run for office again, but there's this whole thing about a state constitutional amendment that says if you've been convicted of a felony involving dishonesty or something, you can't hold public office for 20 years 
.
. Is he really thinking that just because he was chairman of the Oakland County Democratic Party, he's not held a position in government? 
That part is super unclear. And what about his past conviction? Can we even get that unsealed and see how serious it was? 
.
. Let's hope we get some clarity on it soon 
!
. I mean, a felony conviction for election fraud? That's like, super serious stuff! And now there's this whole debate about whether he can even run for office because of it 
. I'm not saying he's automatically disqualified or anything, but come on, you gotta have some integrity if you wanna be in public service 
.
. I mean, corruption scandals like Kwame Kilpatrick's are a big deal, and we need people who are gonna keep it real in office 
. If McGuinness can't handle the scrutiny of his past mistakes, then maybe he shouldn't be running for mayor 
, so what do I know? Maybe Kelley's motion is legit and we should totally investigate this further 
. But from where I'm standing, it looks like McGuinness has some serious 'splainin' to do 
.
I'm reading about this and I'm like... wait, didn't they do some shady stuff back in the day? Like, it's not even 20 years since he was convicted, so shouldn't that already be a red flag? 
And what's with the ambiguity around whether being party chair counts as holding public office? It seems kinda dodgy to me. 
come on, what's the point of all these laws about people with felonies holding office? it's not like he got a slap on the wrist back in 2011... $1k fine and community service? that's basically a Saturday morning 
. and now we're questioning his eligibility? 
what's next, background checks for everyone who wants to run for mayor? this is just a bunch of hooey 
. And now there's all this drama about whether he should be allowed to run because of some old felony conviction 
. I guess it's good that people are keeping an eye on this, but can't we just move on from the past already? 
.
Michael McGuinness has made some big mistakes in his past, but he's trying to move forward now. But the question is, can we really move on from our past if we've broken trust or betrayed others? 
. plus, it's not like he was just some random joe who got charged - he was involved in a serious election-fraud scheme 
. should be pretty clear whether or not someone like mcguinness is eligible to hold public office 
.
.
... so, Kelley is trying to get some clarity on that. And if they find out more about McGuinness' conviction, Kelley might be all over it with further legal action 
.
.
I got a bad feelin' about this election 
. I'm not sure if serving as party chair counts or not, but it's definitely worth looking into. This ban thingy was inspired by Kwame Kilpatrick's corruption scandal and it's crazy how much attention to detail is needed now. It's like, what even constitutes "dishonesty, deceit, fraud" anymore? Anyway, I hope this gets sorted out soon so we can get back to focusing on the actual issues 
.
. The people of Pontiac deserve better than someone who might be hiding something from them 
.