Emailed to IPR by a member of the Judicial Committee (not Bill Hall). For background and links to even earlier stories, see here.
From Mark Hinkle:
Dear JC Chairman Bill Hall,
I’ve read the clarification of the LP JC decision regarding Wagner vs. the LNC.
I have a question for the entire JC regarding this statement:
“Until such time as that occurs, the LNC must continue to treat the
Wagner group of LPO officers similar to other LP state-level affiliate
officers (for example, by providing monthly data dumps, and
recognition on the lp.org website as the official LP state affiliate
Please show me in the LP Bylaws where the JC has the authority to
issue such a statement.
Data Sharing with affiliates, as far as I can determine, is not
codified in the Bylaws. So, it would seem to be outside the authority
of the JC to issue such a ruling.
Likewise, there is no mention of our web site in the LP Bylaws. So,
again it would seem to be outside the authority of the JC to issue
such a ruling.
According to our current Bylaws, Article 9: Judicial Committee, Section 2:
2. The subject matter jurisdiction of the Judicial Committee is
limited to consideration of only
those matters expressly identified as follows:
a. suspension of affiliate parties (Article 6, Section 6),
b. suspension of officers (Article 7, Section 8),
c. suspension of National Committee members-at-large (Article 8, Section 5),
d. voiding of National Committee decisions (Article 8, Section 13),
e. challenges to platform planks (Rule 5, Section 7),
f. challenges to Resolutions (Rule 6, Section 2), and
g. suspension of Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates
(Article 14, Section
The line “2.a suspension of affiliate parties (Article 6, Section 6)”
seems to be the only relevant rule here.
Since there are affiliates that we don’t, currently, send data dumps
to for reasons other than disaffiliation, i.e. there’s no one to send
the data to, there is no connection between data dumps and
And since there is nothing in our Bylaws that require the LNC to link
our web site to affiliate party web sites, that too seems to be
outside the jurisdiction of the JC.
Would you please confer with the entire JC and let me know your
thoughts on this matter.
Yours in liberty……………………Mark Hinkle, LNC Chair
“It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless
minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.”
– Samuel Adams
Response from Bill Hall:
Dear Mr. Hinkle:
The Judicial Committee is not willing to issue any further
clarification of its opinion in the Wagner matter, or engage in an
ongoing argument over the basis for its decision.
Personally, I feel that our decision could not have been clearer, and
it is now up to the Libertarian National Committee to decide whether
it will comply with the Libertarian Party Bylaws, as duly interpreted
by the Judicial Committee.
Very truly yours,