Wisconsin Cases June 08, 2022: Griffin v. Milwaukee Election Comm'n

Case Description

1

ORDER

JAMES D. PETERSON DISTRICT JUDGE

Pro se plaintiff Ieshuh Griffin was an unsuccessful candidate in the Milwaukee mayoral primary election. She alleged that various defendants involved in the primary election manipulated the election results to reduce her share of the votes, preventing her from advancing to the special general election held on April 5, 2022. I dismissed her case at screening for failure to state a claim. Dkt. 2. The clerk's office entered judgment against her. Dkt. 3. She now moves for relief from that judgment. Dkt. 4.

Her motion is timely under Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but she has not provided any reason that would justify relief. Facial plausibility is a pleading requirement. Ashcroft v. Iqbal , 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). Whether a complaint states a plausible claim is a question that calls for the court to apply judicial experience and common sense. Id . My original order explained why I concluded that her allegations were implausible, and Griffin does not address the fundamental implausibility of her allegations, which was the cornerstone of my decision.

2

Griffin also asks for my recusal, alleging that I have prejudged her case. But the only evidence she cites is my decision against her. Griffin's disagreement with my decision on the merits can provide a basis for appeal, but not my recusal. In re City of Milwaukee , 788 F.3d 717, 722 (7th Cir. 2015).

Griffin makes other assertions about the conduct of the case, which I have considered. But none of them suggest any sound reason to grant relief from the judgment in this case.

ORDER

IT IS ORDERED plaintiff Ieshuh Griffin's motion for relief from judgment and my recusal, Dkt. 4, is DENIED.