Herrmann said in a press release that he decided to end his run due to "isolated problems with his campaign's signature collection process that will result in a shortfall in the number of validated signatures."
[...]
"Despite the hard work of dedicated volunteers and other staff throughout the district, it appears that we will not be able to satisfy the procedural requirements to be on the Republican primary ballot," Herrmann said.
"Although we collected well over the 1988 signatures required from qualified Republican voters, we do not believe enough will be validated to meet the threshold. As a business leader and elected official, I have always been committed to addressing issues practically. Contesting matters further would not serve the Republican Party or the citizens of the 4th Congressional District well."
"I am deeply grateful for the outpouring of support I've received from volunteers, donors, and voters,'' he added. "Although I am disappointed to have to discontinue the campaign, I am gratified by the public's positive response to our message of fiscal responsibility and small government. I look forward to continuing this work in other ways. I remain committed to seeing Jim Himes defeated this fall and bringing a new direction to Washington."
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.