Howard Dean and the DNC Violate The Constitution By Disallowing Votes

[UALRBSofL]

"If you go before February 5, you're basically screwed because you get no delegates," he said. "We've lost 210 delegates. We're the

fourth largest state in the nation, and we have zero delegates."

"I'm not asking for a penny, I'm not asking for a dime in this action," DiMaio said. "I'm just asking for my vote to count."

The appellate court is not expected to deliver a decision until next month.

Steinberg, who is handling the case pro bono, said that if the ruling goes against DiMaio, he will appeal to the Supreme Court.


http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/17/attorney.dnc/index.html

[RBInMaine]

1. BS ! They violated the RULES. Rules ARE consitutional !!

[RiverStone]

29. This is like arguing religion - round and round.

I say the votes were based on a false premise and a non-primary...

All some others see IS the votes, no matter the legitimacy of the contest, the non-participants, or if the states followed...yes --- the rules.

How can reasonable people see the same thing but see it so differently? :shrug:

I have yet to figure that out!

[rucky]

2. Oh, goody. So Scalito gets to pick our nominee?

[slick8790]

3. I highly doubt Constitutional rights apply to primary elections.

Which are a private matter simply hosted by the states. There's nothing in the constitution about primary elections, or political parties for that matter. The DNC can count whoever the hell they want, however the hell they want, be it fair or not.

[Maribelle]

12. Then why did the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta agree to hear the case?

[slick8790]

15. Because they want to settle this issue once and for all?

There is no constitutional right to a primary vote. The DNC is a private organization. They can elect delegates however they want, and your only recourse if you don't like it is to not vote.

Should Green party and Constitution party supporters sue since there are no official popular vote primaries for those parties? Or the dozens of other small parties?

This is a strawman argument he's making.

[Maribelle]

26. No, they could have settled it by denying to hear it.

Actualy the reason the appeals court has agreed to hear it is because there are historical precedents and rulings by the US Supreme Court on both sides of the issue.

They are "pleading to the Court that the 14th Amendment to our Constitution, our "Equal Protection" amendment, prohibits "the state" from treating one citizen or group of citizens differently from another. We hope that the Court will rule favorably on our case to the benefit of the currently disenfranchised voters of Florida"

[Clovis Sangrail]

30. so then the issue is if the DNC is 'the state'

I don't think they are, but I suppose we'll see what the court thinks.

[Maribelle]

38. The lawsuit names both the DNC and the FDP state party as defendants

[Maribelle]

40. Plaintiff-Appellant brief

ARGUMENT
I. THE DISTRICT COURT ERRED BY FINDING THAT THE
ACTIONS OF THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE
DID NOT CONSTITUTE THE EXERCISE OF POWER
CONFERED OR DELEGATED BY THE STATE OF FLORIDA,
AND THEREFORE, WAS NOT STATE ACTION INVOKING
THE PROVISIONS OF 28 U.S.C SECTION 1343 AND THE
FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION



CONCLUSION
This cause should be reversed with a finding that the DNC, in conducting its National Nominating Convention, is engaged in state action, and that the decision of the DNC to strip Florida of its delegates to the National Nominating Convention, violates DiMaio’s Fourteenth Amendment rights, because it treats him differently, than voters in other states. If the Court finds that DiMaio did not properly set forth assertions in his complaint to allege standing, the decision of the District Court to dismiss DiMaio’s complaint with prejudice, should be reversed, and DiMaio be given the opportunity to amend his complaint to cure said deficiencies.

http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/DiMaio-AppellantBrief11-29-07.pdf

[Clovis Sangrail]

44. so by that logic

if he wins it seems any voter from states other than Fl or Mi would get to sue as well because they would then be "treated differently".
DiMaio would become exempt from the rules they were required to follow, which isn't very equal.


:shrug:

[Kittycat]

4. Your only "right" is to vote in the general election.

All the other rights fall to the rules of the party. Something that has been upheld in court time and time again.

[Recursion]

11. There's not even a guarantee you get to vote for President; it's up to your state

The only Constitutional provision is that the legislature of the state provides how Electors are chosen. That doesn't have to be by a vote.

[Jersey Devil]

16. Point well taken - nomination is a political party procedure

There is no "right to vote" to chose a party nominee. The party can choose its nominees by a roll of the dice if it wants to and it is according to party rules.

[scheming daemons]

5. Actually... the constitution doesn't provide for Primaries at all....

In court case after court case after court case... the supreme court has ruled over the years that political parties can choose their nominees in any manner they so choose.

[SoonerPride]

6. Oklahoma has decided to have our presidential election next month

We're not waiting until November.

Why?

We don't want to, so screw the rest of the country.

We can do what we want.

[slick8790]

9. Psh, amateur stuff.

We here in NJ are having the primaries for 2012 on June 1, 2008. Think about all the influence we'll have!!!

[davidinalameda]

7. what a crock of crap

I wonder who's paying this guy's legal fees

my bet is either Hillary or the McCain campaign

[Exilednight]

8. Your understanding of the Constitution is flawed. There is no law, nor.....

does it say anything about parties holding elections to pick a candidate. In fact, many small parties do not have the money or resources to hold primary elections, so they follow the law and pick their candidate through several legal means.

[thevoiceofreason]

10. Read the law before you post shit.

The respective party is allowed to set the primary however it wants. There is no "disenfranchisment" involved. This is US Supreme Court opinion. And before the kooks took over. Get a grip, or are you auditioning for Dobbs' spot?

[rocktivity]

13. Sue the FL and MI dems who broke DNC rules they agreed to

knowing that there would be consequences. THEY'RE the ones who ripped off the voters, who by the way, were forewarned that their vote WOULDN'T count.

:headbang:
rocknation

[stahbrett]

14. Make each Florida delegate count as 1/4 of a normal delegate

So their votes count, but the delegates' power is vastly diminished. If they violate the rules the next time, reduce their strength even more.

[Clovis Sangrail]

25. nope... reduce to zilch NOW as they were told would happen

It's gotta suck being a FL or Mi voter, but they should be taking it out on their bonehead state politicians not the DNC.
Sue them... they're the ones that took away their votes.

[stahbrett]

36. I agree, IF they were actually told they would get zero delegates

I'm not clear that the specific penalty was stated ahead of time.

[Clovis Sangrail]

37. it was

they were warned when Fl had the first vote on it last summer.
After they went ahead anyways they were told they might lose all of their delegates.
After they voted again to do it anyways, the DNC held a meeting and voted to strip Fl of all of it's delegates.

... and the DNC still said "you have 30 days to change your primary back and not lose your delegates"

FL went into this with their eyes wide open about the consequences.
They were just betting that Dean was bluffing... they lost that bet.

Now they want to fight it in the courts... which I'm sure the repubs are backing whole heartedly.

Mi.. those politicians deserve a special place in the dipshit hall of fame because they saw what was happening with Fl and did the same thing anyways

[AX10]

17. The Democratic party has no authority to speak about disenfranchisement...

anymore, especially in Florida of all places.
Howard Dean has turned out to be quite the dissappointment.

[mckeown1128]

27. Howard Dean has done nothing wrong...

FL and MI decided not hold official(you know as in following the rules) primary. Until MI and FL hold official primaries no one will recognize any delegates from those states.

[Clovis Sangrail]

28. bullshit

the FL politicians gambled with their constituents right to take part in the primary.

They knew the rules and decided they didn't need to follow them.
I realize it's hard to accept that your own people screwed you, but they did.

The DNC is NOT the group to blame for Fl and Mi losing delegates.

[Johnny__Motown]

18. Wrong, a primary is not covered in the Constitution. this would only apply in the GE

Sorry your candidate lost, better luck next time

[theredpen]

19. Which Constitution would that be, UALRBSofL?

[HooptieWagon]

20. 3,4, and 5 are correct. OP is full of shit.

Constitution does not address primaries, and court cases have set precedent that Parties may select candidates in the manner they wish. In fact, for a hundred years or so candidates were selected by parties with no election at all, and the presidential electoral votes were determined by state legislatures with no popular vote at all. So there is no legal recourse for the states of FL and MI to force the votes be counted from elections that broke DNC rules. Not to mention, the candidates themselves assented to the penalty of not awarding delegates from those states. It's a pretty weak and desperate argument the Clinton camp is making...

[MichiganVote]

21. At this point in Michigan, legislation in draft form was being prepared for

a primary in June paid for by private sources. Problem? The state party is for it, the DNC accepts it, the Clinton camp has had no objection but the Obama campaign rejects it prefering that the previously rejected primary outcome be split 50/50.

-0- progress now.

[AX10]

23. It seems...

that Obama is pro-disenfranchisement.

[MichiganVote]

32. Shhh....you'll bring on the political terrorists. Believe me, Michigan residents r paying attention

[mckeown1128]

22. Typical Clinton supporter... don't consider the truth...

it has a known Obama bias... There is nothing in the constitution guarenteing that the a political party HAS to let let FL or MI have delegates for it's nomination process...


but please make crap up...

[meow mix]

24. Hello its a Party Primary. not a GE

duh

[berni_mccoy]

31. That "attorney" ought to have his license revoked.

The Constitution says nothing about how a Political Party is to select it's nominee. The parties are NOT democracies and are not bound to hold elections. They can do whatever they want to choose their representative. Only in a General Election for a federal office do the STATES, as spelled out in the Constitution, decide how they send their electoral representatives to the Congress to choose the candidate for the POTUS. The states can do whatever they want to select their choice. It could be random choice, coin toss, caucus or election. It doesn't matter how they select them, but the state chooses.

[Debi]

33. Where's madfloridian when we need her?

:banghead:

[depakid]

34. The constitution doesn't give anyone a right to vote in a party primary

[pdxmom]

35. Have you ever even read the Constitution? Nothing about political

parties. As a matter of fact, Google Washington's Farewell Address of 1796 to find out his opinion of parties.

[New Dawn]

39. The Democratic Party is a private organization.

Private organizations make their own rules.

[Maribelle]

43. The court of appeals could decide if the DNC rights do not prevail over any countervailing ...

state interest or the interest of any individual voter, along with other arguments.

[Endangered Specie]

41. waaah waaah... please go back to 9th grade civics.

[1800flowers]

42. 1/4 of Floridian dems less likely to vote Dem. if delegates not seated

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/poll_one_quarter_of_florida_de.php

[my3boyz]

45. Boo..hooo...If they would switch parties over a mistake that THEIR

leaders made then so be it! I seriously doubt Florida was going to go for Dems anyway. They vote for a Republican for governor every single time. First Jeb and now this Crist guy. Ugh...