[Lnc-business] Husted v. APRI: Amicus Brief Final Draft

Tue Sep 26 22:46:35 EDT 2017

As noted in the draft minutes of the 9/21 EC meeting, the SCOTUS filing
deadline for said amicus brief was 9/22.

-Alicia

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 6:33 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Before I think about this question, can I ask - is there a point?  As in,
> is this a done deal, already submitted, etc., or is there an opportunity to
> address any issues?  For the latter, I just mean, for now, in "reality,"
> not considering parliamentary possibility, desirability, etc.
>
> Joshua A. Katz
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 5:31 PM, David Demarest <dprattdemarest at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I am comfortable with the reworded portions of the brief shown in Mr.
>> Hall's email. However, I would be interested to see if the descriptions of
>> the LP have been cleaned up a bit.
>>
>> I would guess that most Anarchists and Voluntaryists do vote albiet with
>> the recognition that the bottom-up collaborative leadership by example is
>> at least as effective as the top-down electoral process in achieving
>> freedom despite the top-down regulatory relief benefit.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> ~David Pratt Demarest
>>
>> On Sep 26, 2017 4:33 PM, "Caryn Ann Harlos" <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I will read but am immediately alarmed by that distinction.  Many
>>> anarchists do consider themselves principled non-voters - yet highly
>>> political.  The immediate past Chair of the Libertarian
>>> Party of Colorado - Jay R North - is an example.  He is not alone.  I
>>> will read to see if it is accurate but let's not misrepresent a group that
>>> we are in a position to know about.  (I'm an anarchist - though I vote -
>>> myself so kinda know the community and the nuances - it's not a blanket
>>> thing)
>>>
>>> -Caryn Ann
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 3:18 PM Oliver Hall <oliverbhall at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Greetings,
>>>>
>>>> Please find attached a PDF of the amicus brief as filed on behalf of
>>>> the Libertarian National Committee in *Husted v. A. Philip Randolph
>>>> Institute*, No. 16-980.
>>>>
>>>> After the executive committee meeting addressing this matter, I
>>>> reviewed the draft brief and sent a lengthy list of comments and
>>>> corrections, including those I received from committee members, to our
>>>> counsel from Wilmer Hale. I also discussed these concerns with counsel by
>>>> telephone. I believe the changes the firm made to address committee
>>>> members' concerns are acceptable, although in some cases I would have
>>>> preferred different wording. I have included detailed notes on several of
>>>> those changes below, to provide a sense of how the concerns raised were
>>>> addressed in the final draft.
>>>>
>>>> I wanted to address one point in particular: the Wilmer team thought it
>>>> important to indicate that principled non-voting is not the same as an
>>>> anarchist's complete abstention from the process. Therefore, although I had
>>>> suggested replacing any mention of not voting in "a single election cycle"
>>>> with more general language referencing "abstaining from the electoral
>>>> process," the Wilmer team tried to chart a middle path between those two
>>>> options. I agreed that was an appropriate strategy, since we are only
>>>> arguing for a constitutional right not to vote based upon the choices, or
>>>> lack thereof, in particular election cycles, and not necessarily the
>>>> constitutional right not to vote under any and all circumstances.
>>>>
>>>> I know that committee members were not pleased with how little time the
>>>> committee had to review and approve this brief. That is understandable. It
>>>> should not have happened. In the future, I will make sure it doesn't.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you and I hope this final draft meets your approval.
>>>>
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Oliver B. Hall
>>>> Special Counsel
>>>> Libertarian National Committee617-953-0161 <(617)%20953-0161>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Comments on Changes to Final Draft of Amicus Brief*
>>>>
>>>> Page 3, second sentence: "But the Ohio policy at issue—a
>>>> “use-it-or-lose it” rule whereby a registered voter is deemed
>>>> “inactive,” commencing a process that can result in the voter being
>>>> purged from the voter rolls, because he or she did not vote during a
>>>> single election cycle—also raises serious constitutional concerns."
>>>>
>>>>    - In the draft form, this sentence stated that a voter could be purged
>>>>    "merely for not voting in a single election cycle"; the addition of
>>>>    "commencing a process that can result..." makes the sentence
>>>>    accurate, even though it still contains the "single election cycle"
>>>>    language
>>>>
>>>> Page 3, last paragraph: reference to "a particular election cycle" was
>>>> changed to plural, "particular election cycles"
>>>>
>>>> Page 3, last full sentence: "Commencing a process to remove voters
>>>> from the rolls because they did not vote in a single election cycle
>>>> undermines voters’ ability to take this type of political action, penalizes
>>>> them for their acts of political expression, and is akin to forced
>>>> political activity."
>>>>
>>>>    - In the draft form, this sentence simply began, "Removing voters
>>>>    from the rolls because..."; again, as revised, this sentence is accurate,
>>>>    despite containing the "single election cycle" language
>>>>
>>>> Page 4, first paragraph: the reference to "particular election cycle"
>>>> has been changed to the plural, "particular election cycles"
>>>>
>>>> Page 4, first paragraph: contains a complete and accurate statement of
>>>> how the statutory scheme works as applied, including the steps of mailing
>>>> a notice, and then failing to vote in two subsequent election cycles
>>>>
>>>> Page 13, first full paragraph: the sentence beginning, "Coercing them
>>>> to vote," now includes the language "if they choose to abstain from
>>>> the electoral process"
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>>
>>> --
>>> *In Liberty,*
>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
>>> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>> <http://www.lpcolorado.org>
>>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>>>
>>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>> *We defend your rights*
>>> *And oppose the use of force*
>>> *Taxation is theft*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lnc-business mailing list
>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170926/88ffbaa4/attachment-0002.html>