The point of the lawsuit is that it is a taxpayer funded event - therefore not private.
But there are pre-stated rules to the contest saying contestants must have X number of the voters as a percentage of the vote or they would be wasting the people's time and they would be an interruption representing to fringe a view.
That is why on a national scale the KKK, Green Party or Libertarians don't make it to the debate.
The rules for everybody are stated BEFORE the contest begins and is applied to all equally.
If someone had 15%, they could debate I guess.
but there lies the hypocrisy of the libertarian candidate - it's not right if it's publicly funded and he's not included, but if he is included, he's alright with the public funding.
Also, what defines access? That he gets into the event, or that he gets onto the stage?
By their logic, any meeting or event held in a public forum that isn't entirely paid for by private funds will be held according to the whims of anyone who sues. Community theater play at the high school that isn't entirely 'paid for'? Well then, just sue them, and you'll get a part in the play.
That's the real issue here, and many people seem to be missing it: They're not just suing to stop the debate because it's publicly funded, they're suing to stop the debate UNLESS bednarik gets a spot on stage. In which case, public funds going towards a private event is just a-ok!
And again, he has no standing to interject himself into the debate. He's not a resident of arizona, so he's not one of the harmed parties. All the harmed parties could do (being AZ residents) is have the debate cancelled.