Stevens Objects To Reasoning Offered By Judicial Committee For Rejecting The Delegates' Petition

After voting 6-1 to accept jurisdiction over the issues raised in the Delegates’ Petition (with Dr. Tom Stevens being the only Judicial Committee member voting against the Judicial Committee having "subject matter jurisdiction"), the Judicial Committee voted 5-2 to reject the appeal.

Ruth Bennett, the Chair of the Libertarian Party’s Judicial Committee reported the May 6, 2009 decision as follows:

By a vote of six (Bennett, Cobb, Hacker, Nicks, Nolan, Sarwark) to one (Stevens) the Judicial Committee recognizes that we have jurisdiction in the matter of the Delegates’ Petition of April 30, 2009. We are, however, by a vote of five (Bennett, Cobb, Hacker, Nolan, Stevens) to two (Sarwark, Nicks) declining to accept the petition. The relief requested in the Petition is reinstatement of R. Lee Wrights and as Mr. Wrights has been appointed to the National Committee, the appeal is moot.

Respectfully Submitted,

Ruth E. Bennett
Chair
Libertarian Party Judicial Committee

The reasoning expressed by the majority of Judicial Committee members voting to reject the Delegates’ Petition was that the petition was moot since it sought the reinstatement of R. Lee Wrights to the National Committee and that as of the date of the vote, Mr. Wrights had already been reappointed to the National Committee.

This position is not mine. I do not believe the relief sought in the Delegates’ Petition was moot.

The wording of the Delegates’ Petition was as follows:

I was a Delegate to the Libertarian Party 2008 National Convention. Pursuant to Article 8, Section 5, I find that the attempted removal of R. Lee Wrights, At-Large Member of the Libertarian National Committee, from the National Committee, without a 2/3 vote of the National Committee, contravenes Bylaws Article 8, Section 5. I affirm his position as an At-Large Representative and ask, per Article 8, Section 12, that the Judicial Committee overturn this attempted removal and direct that Wrights be recognized as an At-Large Member of the National Committee.

If there had been a “decision of the National Committee” to remove R. Lee Wrights, his subsequent re-appointment does not make moot a petition asking the Judicial Committee to overturn the “decision of the National Committee” removing him in the first place. His subsequent reappointment is irrelevant to the issue of whether the original decision of the National Committee contravened the bylaws.

I voted against accepting the Delegates’ Petition because there was no “decision of the National Committee” to overturn and no “suspension” of a National Committee member-at-large by a 2/3 vote of the entire LNC.

In my view, there was no appealable issue properly before us upon which we could schedule a hearing.

In Liberty,

Dr. Tom Stevens
Judicial Committee Member