[Lnc-business] Fwd: Judicial Committee Meeting to be held on August 15th

[Nicholas Sarwark]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Nicholas Sarwark <chair at lp.org>
Date: Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 9:40 PM
Subject: Judicial Committee Meeting to be held on August 15th
To: M Carling <mcarling at gmail.com>
Cc: Rob Latham <freeutahns at gmail.com>, Rob Power
<robpower at robpower.com>, linnabary51 at gmail.com, Rebecca Sink-Burris
<rebecca.sinkburris at gmail.com>, AR Wolf <arwolf at arwolf.com>,
"dianna.visek at gmail.com" <dianna.visek at gmail.com>


Dear Mr. Carling and other members of the Judicial Committee,

I recently received notice that there will be a meeting of your
committee held on August 15th to "consider the case of Ian Epstein vs.
the Libertarian National Committee and to consider rescinding or
amending something previously adopted in the related case of Wes
Wagner vs. the Libertarian National Committee."  This was the first I
had heard that your committee had agreed that Mr. Epstein's petition
was valid and fell under the specifically enumerated list of matters
the Judicial Committee could consider pursuant to Article 9, Section 2
of the Bylaws, which states:

"The subject matter jurisdiction of the Judicial Committee is limited
to consideration of only those matters expressly identified as
follows:
a. suspension of affiliate parties (Article 6, Section 6),
b. suspension of officers (Article 7, Section 7),
c. suspension of National Committee members-at-large (Article 8, Section 5),
d. voiding of National Committee decisions (Article 8, Section 12),
e. challenges to platform planks (Rule 5, Section 7),
f. challenges to Resolutions (Rule 6, Section 2), and
g. suspension of Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates
(Article 15, Section 5)."

The only previous communication I had received regarding this issue
was on July 23rd, when I received the following email:

"Dear Mr. Sarwark,

You are named as a potential respondent in the attached appeal to the
LP Judicial Committee.  Please also find attached a copy of the
current LP bylaws and the rules of appellate procedure of the Judicial
Committee.

M Carling
Chairman, LP Judicial Committee"

I would note that the email copied verbatim above did not include,
"notice that if the prospective respondent(s) desires to respond to
the petition(s) the prospective respondent(s) must do so in writing
within seven days (or promptly, if the request is received during a
National Convention) ("response")" as is apparently required by the
Judicial Committee Rules of Appellate Procedure, section 2.  As I was
not noticed that I was to respond, I did not do so.

If I had been noticed, I would have responded that Mr. Epstein's
demand that I recognize his group as the affiliate of the Libertarian
National Committee in Oregon and my subsequent declining to accede to
that demand was not a suspension of an affiliate party, since his
group was not currently the affiliate pursuant to the prior decision
of the Judicial Committee.  Him sending an email does not magically
make his group the affiliate and then suspend that affiliate, creating
standing to appeal to the Judicial Committee and force a change in the
affiliate party out of whole cloth.  There needs to be an action of
the LNC that falls under the specifically enumerated list of Judicial
Committee subject matter jurisdiction to have an appeal, not the
routine email correspondence of the Chair.  As to the substance of Mr.
Epstein's demand, my response speaks for itself.

If the Judicial Committee does intend to consider Mr. Epstein's
petition and/or to reopen the decision from two terms ago, I would ask
that Mr. Carling recuse himself from any consideration.

As I am certain all members of the Judicial Committee are aware, Mr.
Carling is a member of Mr. Epstein's group.  Mr. Carling acted as
Chair Pro Tem during the 2013 convention of Mr. Epstein's group. Mr.
Carling was elected as a member of the Judicial Committee of at the
2013 convention of Mr. Epstein's group.  Mr. Carling was elected as
Chair of the Judicial Committee of Mr. Epstein's group after the
adjournment of their 2013 convention. Mr. Carling was re-elected to
the Judicial Committee at the 2014 convention of Mr. Epstein's group.
Mr. Carling again acted as Chair Pro Tem at the 2015 convention of Mr.
Epstein's group at which Mr. Epstein was elected Chair.  Mr. Carling
is a named plaintiff in the case of Reeves et. al. v. Wagner et. al.,
(Clackamas
County Circuit Court No. CV12010345) and is an appellant in the
pending appeal of the dismissal of that case by the circuit court (CA
A155618).

As a member of Mr. Epstein's group who has previously acted in
leadership roles at convention and presently is a member of that
group's Judicial Committee, as well as a plaintiff in a lawsuit
against Mr. Wagner's group that was dismissed and is presently on
appeal, Mr. Carling would benefit from a Judicial Committee ruling in
favor of Mr. Epstein's group or a reconsideration of the previous
Judicial Committee ruling that recognized Mr. Wagner's group.  His
position as plaintiff and appellant would be improved by a ruling from
the Judicial Committee that would strengthen his case.

For the above reasons, I ask Mr. Carling to recuse himself from any
decision on whether Mr. Epstein's petition is valid and falls under
the specifically enumerated list of subject matter jurisdiction of the
Judicial Committee, and also ask him to recuse himself from
consideration of Mr. Epstein's petition or reconsideration of the
petition from Mr. Wagner from two terms ago.

Yours in liberty,

Nicholas J. Sarwark

Chair, Libertarian National Committee

cc: members of the Judicial Committee; the LNC Business list.