Federal Court Blocks Virgina Delegate Rule (PDF)

UNITEDSTATES DISTRICTCOURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICTOFVIRGINIA RICHMOND DIVISION ^ | July 11, 2016 | UNITEDSTATES DISTRICTCOURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICTOFVIRGINIA RICHMOND DIVISION

[Mechanicos]

"For the foregoing reasons, judgment will be entered in Correll'sfavor on Counts I and II and the Commonwealth will be permanently enjoined from enforcing Va.Code§ 24.2-545(0)."

Federal Court just UNBOUND the delegates for Virgina.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3174287/Correll.pdf

[Future Useless Eater]

Just find a half-decent reason to block Erling “Curly” Haughland from attending the convention.

He’s the troublemaker, and he’s also the A**Hole who was quoted: The People don’t select our candidate. WE (the delegates) select our candidate.

[Right-wing Librarian]

Is this judge’s name and address public information?

[Right-wing Librarian]

I hope many will join me in WRITING IN Donald J Trump’s name.

[Right-wing Librarian]

You won’t have to worry about not voting Republican again. If they do steal it from Trump, there will be no America left to restore. The situation is that precarious NOW.

[Mjreagan]

I apologize for being so confused, but can someone explain the upshot here? Correll is claiming this as a victory and delegates are unbound and Trump seems to be claiming victory and that the delegates ARE bound....

So which is it?

[dp0622]

Now now now, I am one of the biggest doubters of fairness here, but the BRexit vote thread had a LOT of that quote before the reults and look what happened :)

[mlo]

"Is this court declaring that the past 150 years of primary selection were unconstitutional and only NOW we're doing it right?"

We haven't been doing it this way for 150 years.

[mlo]

"Where is it for the court to tell the state and the party how to run their primaries?"

Where is it for the state to tell the party how to run its primary?

[Mjreagan]

A political party doesn’t have a right to operate in a state, it has a privilege.

[Future Useless Eater]

I skimmed this whole d*mn pdf file, and I think this thread mis-reported its impact,
which led to an unnecessary panic or uproar here at FR.

I am not a lawyer, and I welcome any lawyer to explain why I am wrong about this...

The VA Statute 545 which was knocked down, MIGHT have been used to convict ANY of the
49 VA delegates of a misdemeanor if they did not ALL vote for Trump on the 1st ballot.

But NO reasonable person here or elsewhere was expecting ALL delegates to vote for Trump.
Nearly EVERYONE expected VA to cast its delegates proportionately,
based on the commonwealth-wide vote, as follows:
17 Delegates to vote for Trump on the first ballot,
16 Delegates to vote for Rubio on the first ballot,
8 Delegates to vote for Cruz on the first ballot,
5 De;egates to vote for Kasich on the first ballot, and
3 Delegates to vote for Carson on the first ballot.

Mr. Correll was selected as a delegate to the Republican National Convention,
and SIGNED A COPY of the “Declaration and Statement of Qualifications” that
had been included in the RPV s Rule 16(f) Filing. In doing so,
Correll AGREED TO THE REQUIREMENTS of RNC Rule 16(c)(2).

Rule 16(c)(2) will be in effect thru the beginning of the RNC, and it could be
subject to change during the convention.

Apparently Mr. Correll worried that a clause in 16(c)(2) might force all 49 delegates
to vote for the plurality winner (Trump) because that rule mentioned “state law”.

With state law 545 now moot, PROPORTIONALLY BOUND voting is now understood to be what shall
be expected to happen for Virginia. Misdemeanor charges won’t apply (but getting booted out
and replaced) will still apply if VA delegates try to vote some other way (than proportional) on the 1st ballot.

AND THAT IS EXACTLY what all of us have been expecting all along.
Nothing in this ruling today frees EVERY VA delegate to vote however they please on the first ballot.

IF I UNDERSTAND you (Mechanicos) you seem to be agreeing (in other posts on other threads)
with my summary.

[Rusty0604]

I agree, thanks.

[Mechanicos]

Your take is accurate. They can vote proportionally and are bound to do so by both National and State party rules/agreement which the National can enforce.

[jennychase]

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump 3h3 hours ago
Senior United States District Judge Robert E. Payne today ruled in favor of Trump campaign delegates who had argued..https://www.facebook.com/DonaldTrump/posts/10157294436575725 …

[jennychase]

FEDERAL COURT SIDES WITH GRASSROOTS ACTIVISTS: RNC DELEGATES ARE BOUND TO FOLLOW ELECTION RESULTS Delegates Remain Committed to Donald J. Trump;
Anti-Trump Effort Dealt Crippling Blow
(New York) July 11, 2016 – Senior United States District Judge Robert E. Payne today ruled in favor of Trump campaign delegates who had argued – in line with overwhelming public opinion – that RNC delegates must follow election results and that delegates cannot be stolen at the national convention. Delegate Beau Correll, Jr., had brought the suit against the Commonwealth of Virginia hoping to reject the will of the voters, but was soundly defeated.
Specifically, the Court found that RNC Rule 16, which binds delegates based on their election results, “is in effect presently and that it controls the allocation and binding of delegates as to their voting at convention.” (p. 6) The Court held that the Plaintiff’s “expert testimony” from Erling ‘Curly’ Haugland was not credible, lacked “textual support,” (p.6) and that “delegates are bound by RNC Rule 16.” (p. 7) Further, the Court found that by signing the “Declaration and Statement of Qualification,” RNC delegates are bound by RNC Rule 16(c)(2) (p. 10), and that this Declaration obligated Correll to vote in accordance with Republican Party rules and Virginia’s election results. (p. 46) Trump Campaign Attorney and former FEC Chairman Don McGahn issued the following statement:
"The court has confirmed what we have said all along: Rule 16 is in effect and thus delegates, including Correll, are bound to vote in accordance with the election results. The court did not buy what Curly Haugland was selling, and noted that his testimony has no support in the rule's text and was contradicted by his own book, Unbound. This case puts his unbound theory to rest, and is a fatal blow to the Anti-Trump agitators.”

[july4thfreedomfoundation]

The Virginia state law binding the delegates.....struck down as unconstitutional.

The RNC rules which require delegates to be bound.....still stands (unless there are enough members on the rule committee willing to change it and bring it to a floor vote of all the delegates).

This is how I understand it.

[DarthVader]

This is the result that we wanted at the State Convention. Correll unwittingly gave the Trump campaign a victory by this ruling.

[stilloftyhenight]

#NeverHillary

If they cheat Trump, I will vote the L candidate: Gary Johnson.

[NTHockey]

Good analysis, thank you. One question: Was VA a proportional primary or winner take all primary? If it was a winner take all primary, any reasonable person would have expected ALL delegates to vote for the winner. If delegates are not bound by state law, this clown is free to vote for Mickey Mouse, Superman or even, SWMNBN.

I have a problem whenever a federal court strikes down a state law, particularly one that is reserved to the states on how they conduct elections. One man, one vote means nothing. This man’s pledge means nothing.

This ruling opens up a Pandora’s box. Will electors to the Electoral College be free to vote their conscience? Will there be proportional voting? Will the GOP overturn the primary results and risk destruction?

I am of a mind that the GOPe doesn’t care; they will get their way, no matter what the consequences are. They would rather lose the House, Senate and Presidency than to reduce their self-inflated ego.

[BykrBayb]

Sweet! He does a very good job of steering the focus back to the facts of the matter, as opposed to her feelings. Thanks for posting this.

[Carry me back]

I think this judge is a bushite. They are the ones who are trying to destroy freedom.