interest in the case was inadequate because, once Proposal 2 had been passed, “[t]heir interest in seeing Proposal 2 enforced ... ‘[wa]s greatly diminished due to the state’s responsibility in enforcing and defending [Proposal 2] as written.’ ” Coalition, 501 F.3d at 781 (quoting Northland Family Planning Clinic, Inc. v. Cox, 487 F.3d 323, 346 (6th Cir.2007)). In line with this conclusion, the Sixth Circuit has consistently held that a generalized political or ideological interest is not sufficient to support intervention by right. See Northland, 487 F.3d at 345 (observing that an organization had a weak case for intervention where it had “only an ideological interest in the litigation”); Providence Baptist Church v. Hillandale Comm., Ltd., 425 F.3d 309, 316-17 (6th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>) (quoting Athens Lumber Co., Inc. v. Fed. Elec.
holding that petitioncirculating committee was not entitled to intervention in an action challenging the constitutionality of an ordinance because its stake in the case was  so generalized it will not support a claim for intervention of right  holding the defendants claim that he was denied the right to testify was appropriate for direct review when the record was adequately developed to permit full consideration of the defendants claim the pertinent facts were undisputed a pcr hearing was not necessary to resolve a factual dispute and would not aid in the application of the law and the defendants claim was presented not as an ineffective assistance of counsel claim but rather as an error committed by the trial court in excluding the defendants testimony which was not an appropriate basis for an ineffective assistance of counsel claim holding that the challenge to the constitutionality of a 1996 fort lauderdale ordinance was moot where the ordinance had been amended in 1998 holding that an appeal was not moot because the amendment to the ordinance at bar did not give the petitioner the relief sought so that the petitioners claim and injury remain viable holding that a plaintiff had standing to attack an entire ordinance including portions of the ordinance not applied to the plaintiff