It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Alxandro
That's great new, more power to him.
.. but if and when he loses he better bow out gracefully and not decide to run as an Independent, otherwise Obama will surely win re-election.
Maybe that's been the plan all along and Paul is being used as a pawn?
The National Party Rules also take precedence over state party rules.
a state party cannot be required to follow [a state] election statute if the election statute violates national party rules
Originally posted by rougeskut
Yes, the same in Germany & The Netherlands. It is all Romney, Paul is rarely if at all mentioned. I was actually watching this election cycle and the different MSM sources in a number of western countries, and you see the bias is endemic throughout the entire western based MSM....
Although the federal cases relied upon by Defendant to protect the right of political parties to free association as against restrictive state law are interesting, there seems to be no question here but that state party rules are subordinate to national party rules, and Rule 32(a) of the latter . . . specifically gives state law precedence over state party rules.
After holding that a national party's rules concerning qualifications of convention delegates prevailed over contrary state law, the Court in Cousins, 419 U.S. at 483 n.4, expressly left open the extent to which "principles of the political question doctrine counsel against judicial intervention."
Should a state party select delegates in a manner contrary to national party rules, the national party may bar such delegates from sitting at the national convention. Democratic Party of the United States, supra; Cousins, supra. In short, the National Republican Party, not the state statute, is responsible for the alleged infringement of plaintiffs' constitutional rights.
Originally posted by jlm912
Back in 2008....
Jennifer Sheehan, Legal Counsel for the RNC, plainly stated in a letter to Nancy Lord, Utah National Committeewoman, several weeks before the convention, “[The] RNC does not recognize a state’s binding of national delegates, but considers each delegate a free agent who can vote for whoever they choose.” And, “The national convention allows delegates to vote for the individual of their choice, regardless of whether the person’s name is officially placed into nomination or not.”
Jennifer Sheehan, Legal Counsel for the RNC, plainly stated in a letter to Nancy Lord, Utah National Committeewoman, several weeks before the convention, “[The] RNC does not recognize a state’s binding of national delegates, but considers each delegate a free agent who can vote for whoever they choose.”
Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by jlm912
First this is not in the rules anywhere. Second it doesn't matter. Many delegates are bound by state law. No matter what the RNC may say they do not supersede state law.