[Vision2020] The Art of the Whine
starbliss at gmail.com
Thu Apr 21 17:31:31 PDT 2016
I am not a fan of Donald Trump, in the least.
However, regardless of whether he in advance "figured out" the delegate
selection process or not, Trump is roughly correct. The delegate process
is rigged, in both the Republican (and Democratic) nomination process.
Given this process controls who will represent the voters for the two
dominate political parties in the US, it calls into question the
fundamentals of our so called 'democracy."
The Democratic and Republican parties are private organizations, we will
hear, and they thus can decide for themselves how to nominate their
candidates. But according to the "state actor" legal principle, political
parties as so called "private organizations" can be regulated by the state,
and have been. Choosing who will be a candidate in a state election
indicates these political parties are not really "private" organizations,
but a critical part of the electoral process subject to state law.
The established law on these issues is not as clear as it seems it should
be. The DNC "super delegate" appears to be an anti-democratic rigging of
the nomination process, many agree, so should they be banned?
Anyway, the following discussion of these issues goes far beyond my legal
*The Legal Status of Political Parties: A Reassessment of Competing
*Nathaniel Persily & Bruce E. Cain*
*I . THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM*
*The crux of the problem political parties pose for lawyers and judges
*parties’ uncertain constitutional and legal status. Are they state actors
and therefore subject to*
*constitutional restraints imposed by the Bill of Rights and Fourteenth
Amendment, for instance,*
* or are they private associations, similar to churches and bowling clubs,
that can use the*
*Constitution as a shield against state power?9 A substantial amount of the
caselaw in this area*
*rests on whether judges switch on the state actor toggle. For if parties
are state actors, then they*
*have no right to condition membership on the basis of race or other
*they cannot raise associational rights claims when the state regulates how
they select their*
*members or leaders, and perhaps they would not even have standing to sue
the government (or*
*the same level of government, depending on whether we are talking about
state or federal*
*parties11) for any imposition whatsoever. As most recognize, this sticky
state actor question is*
*probably best answered by some categorization of parties as state actor
hybrids or as we suggest*
*later, by the familiar law review refrain, “it depends.”*
*Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett*
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 10:17 AM, Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com> wrote:
> “Trump complains that the delegate selection
> process is rigged.” — News reports
> *"The Art of the Whine" *
> By Calvin Trillin, Deadline Poet
> He says he’s smart—a master of the deal.
> The other guys are losers and they’re fools.
> One has to wonder: If this guy’s so smart
> How come he couldn’t figure out the rules?
> Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . .
> "Moscow Cares" (the most fun you can have with your pants on)
> http://www.MoscowCares.com <http://www.moscowcares.com/>
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Vision2020