Karamo removal lawsuit hears from author of 'Robert's Rules of Order'

GRAND RAPIDS — An expert on parliamentary procedure who co-authored the latest edition of "Robert's Rules of Order" testified Wednesday that it appears Kristina Karamo was properly removed as chair of the Michigan Republican Party.

Thomas Balch, a professional parliamentarian and former legislative analyst, used a whiteboard and projector to transform his testimony in Kent County Circuit Court to something more akin to a college lecture.

Michigan Republican Party state committee members who oppose Karamo are seeking a judge's declaration that Karamo was lawfully removed at a Jan. 6 meeting. They also are asking Judge Joseph Rossi to issue a preliminary injunction to restrict Karamo's ability to act on behalf of the party while the case proceeds.

On Jan. 20, state committee members who voted to remove Karamo elected former ambassador and congressman Pete Hoekstra to replace her. The court heard Wednesday that with both Karamo and Hoekstra claiming to be the lawful chair, confusion has ensued as the Feb. 27 presidential primary and the March 2 Republican caucus/convention approaches. Karamo has scheduled a convention in Detroit; Hoekstra has called one in Grand Rapids on the same date.

Key questions in the lawsuit are whether the Jan. 6 meeting to remove Karamo was lawfully called and whether enough lawful votes were cast at that meeting to remove her.

Some areas of the Michigan Republican Party bylaws are ambiguous. The bylaws state that anything not addressed in the bylaws is governed by Robert's Rules of Order.

Balch testified that the request for a special meeting by the anti-Karamo forces appears to have been properly submitted, though there were problems with it. The special meeting request included an announced date and location for the meeting, which was not proper, because scheduling the requested meeting remained at that time within Karamo's power, he testified.

But Karamo's response to the special meeting request failed to meet her obligations because the special meeting Karamo called for Jan. 13 did not include on its initial agenda the items requested by the dissenting members, including discussion of Karamo's possible removal, Balch testified.

For that reason, the dissenting members were within their rights in scheduling their own special meeting when Karamo did not call one that properly responded to their request within 15 days, Balch testified.

Balch said he interprets the bylaws to mean the dissenters needed a quorum Jan. 6 made up of a bare majority of the 106-member state committee and that it could reach that quorum not just through state committee members in attendance, but also through proxies.

But he agreed with Karamo lawyer Donald Campbell that there were other plausible interpretations, including one in which proxies could not be used to reach the required quorum. Without proxies, there was no quorum on Jan. 6.

"Obviously, there's disagreement," Balch told the court. "I've tried to explain why ... a certain interpretation makes sense."

On Tuesday, Rossi denied a motion from Karamo to dismiss the lawsuit.

Those trying to oust Karamo, who was elected at a state convention in February 2023, say they are unhappy over lackluster fundraising and other issues.

The hearing is scheduled to resume Thursday.

Free Press staff writer Arpan Lobo contributed to this report.

Contact Paul Egan: 517-372-8660 or pegan@freepress.com. Follow him on X, @paulegan4.

This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Karamo removal lawsuit hears from author of 'Robert's Rules of Order'