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

Tue Sep 26 23:24:29 EDT 2017

I would like to know how the EC provided a different statement of Party
purpose and formation than our Bylaws.

That is completely unacceptable.

-Caryn Ann

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 8:47 PM Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170927/a7795c19/attachment-0002.html>