Libertarian National Committee At-large Rep. Sam Bohler introduced a motion Friday to censure the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire, pointing to what he described as antisemitic and homophobic content shared by the affiliate on social media. The motion also invited the party to self-disaffiliate.
The motion, posted to the LNC’s public Business List on September 12, references a 9/11-themed image depicting a Hasidic Jewish man piloting a plane toward the Twin Towers with the caption “We did it,” as well as the use of slurs in other posts. Bohler argued that the affiliate’s messaging undermines the Libertarian Party’s commitment to individual dignity as well as damages its national reputation.
“LPNH’s posts have devolved into low-effort rage bait,” Bohler wrote. “The audience those posts attract is toxic, and as some of them join the affiliate, it will only push it further into deplorable rhetoric.”
Bohler’s resolution calls on the New Hampshire state party to disaffiliate and cease using the Libertarian Party name, allowing another group to petition for affiliation in its place. The full language of the motion reads:
Whereas, the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire has published posts on social media depicting a Jewish person piloting a plane in connection to the September 11 attacks, and the use of homophobic slurs, which reasonable people would consider antisemitic and bigoted;
Whereas, this behavior diminishes the Libertarian Party’s image on the national stage, damaging not only our reputation but also our ability to grow;
Whereas, a previous attempt to censure was dismissed, yet the pattern of behavior has only escalated;
Be it therefore resolved, that the Libertarian National Committee censures the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire for its despicable conduct, and invites them to disaffiliate and cease its use of the Libertarian Party name so as to allow another group more in line with the values of this Party to petition for affiliation.
This is the second such censure attempt targeting the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire in 2025. The first, introduced in May by LNC Treasurer Bill Redpath, cited racist and antisemitic imagery as well as the affiliate’s endorsement of Republican Donald Trump during the 2024 election cycle. That motion was later combined with a separate proposal by Redpath to censure the Libertarian Party of Colorado and failed in a 5–10 vote, with LNC Chair Steven Nekhaila abstaining.
Ahead of that first vote, LNC Region 6 Alternate Ben Weir, who also chairs the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire, issued a warning that members backing the motion would be “treated as an enemy to the cause for Liberty” and face his and the state party’s “wrath.” He added that there would be no tolerance for “unjust interference.”
The party later released a set of self-imposed standards it said would guide future messaging if critics agreed to follow similar rules. It otherwise did not apologize for its approach.
In response to Bohler’s new motion, Weir again criticized the effort, calling it a distraction from more pressing party needs. “Anyone who votes in favor of this or co-sponsors it is either a COINTELPRO operative or a woke communist infiltrator that needs to leave the Party,” Weir wrote. He later invited critical members to also censure him, saying they “care more about virtue signaling than actually doing something positive to bring people together.”
As of September 12, the motion had several co-sponsors and indications of support. However, not all doing so are willing to back it for the same reasons. At-large Rep. Travis Bost, for example, opposed the rationale of Bohler’s motion regarding messaging but said he would support a censure effort focused solely on the affiliate’s 2024 Trump endorsement.
This issue does not go away. At the Libertarian Party of California convention held February 14 and 15, 2026 this post came up. I would have commented in Third Party Watch because there were more responses about this issue but their post concerning this anti-semitic statement is closed. At the convention the agenda item relating to the election of delegates to the Libertarian Party National convention was occurring. There was a list of names of those nominated to be a delegate. A delegate made a motion to withdraw the name of someone involved in these anti-semitic statements from the list (ballot). He (The name of the person to be withdrawn) is (was) a member of the New Hampshire Party. I in support of his motion said I remember I read in Third Party Watch and Independent Political Report this person made racist and bigoted statements and thus he should not represent California [as a delegate]. Another delegate objected to this motion saying just because it is written in Third Party Watch does not make it true. He also mentioned he (the person some of us wanted dropped) wanted to serve as a delegate. I thought of responding what you are saying is professor Phillies is not being truthful. I did not respond because I would have had to wait until there were no delegates speaking in favor of the motion and because I “read the room” and I knew the motion was going to fail and he was going to be elected.
The motion to drop his name from the list failed (I and a few others voted in support of the motion.) and voting was held to approve the list of those nominated to be delegates to the national Party convention. He was elected and thus he will be representing the California Party at the National convention.
>That said, IIRC, Colorado went beyond that, and officially nominated Brainworm Bobby instead of Chase Oliver.
They tried to but got cut off at the pass by Caryn Ann Harlos doing her job and filing the Oliver nomination paperwork with the Colorado Secretary of State.
>And, to riff on Winger, I presume LP Colorado, unlike NH, DOES have access as an officially recognized minor party? (Unless for some reason it lost that?)
Colorado does have minor party status and ballot access and will not be losing it anytime soon, unless LPCO really screws it up and they lose 35,000 registered Libertarians. (That’s a concern, not a challenge!)
I am going to add another comment, going back to the May resolution. I know it proposed censuring both NH and Colorado for racist language, and also NH for endorsing Trump (which ties to my previous comment).
That said, IIRC, Colorado went beyond that, and officially nominated Brainworm Bobby instead of Chase Oliver.
And, to riff on Winger, I presume LP Colorado, unlike NH, DOES have access as an officially recognized minor party? (Unless for some reason it lost that?)
So, in this case, is the LP executive going to pursue further action?
Jordan, thanks. Meanwhile, speaking of censure and Twitter, I believe that, at least in the view of the New Hampshire LP, and of those of us who like to snark, LP National committed an own goal yesterday.
I quote:
“Democrats, the party of censorship & speech police.”
https://x.com/LPNational/status/1968995404189466870
Beyond what I said above, why is LP National singling out Democrats among the two duopoly parties? Especially given the party’s semi-official Trump flirtation last year, and events of the past week, this is hugely hypocritical.
To snark away, I’ll respectfully suggest Nekhaila and others read Matthew 7:3-5, then look at who all gets to run LP National’s Twitter.
A censure vote isn’t a unique disciplinary action under the Libertarian Party’s bylaws, so it’s a simple majority of those voting. I personally suspect this is why this motion and the previous censure motion from Redpath were put forward with the “please disaffiliate” language, because an outright disaffiliation vote would have required three-fourths of the whole board.
As a non-Libertarian, question and two comments:
What does this need, 2/3 of those voting, including abstentions? Simple majority of entire board?
Comment: Someone get Ben Weir about 500 chill pills. First, the FBI has no reason to waste time COINTELPRO-ing the Libertarian Party, dood. Second, yes, let’s “bring people together” around racism and conspiracy theories. Given how much the LP plunged in the 2024 presidential election because of things related to this, plus the Trump issue, will be a GREAT way to “bring people together.
Comment 2: I think Bohler is being HUGELY charitable on his interpretation of the “why” on these social media posts.
The motion currently has enough votes in support to pass. Today is the last day for LNC members to vote or change their votes.
The vote remains ongoing. Chair Steven Nekhaila has voted in favor of the motion, which is a reversal from his abstention in the previous censure vote aimed at both the New Hampshire and Colorado affiliates.
Nekhaila writes:
A vote is currently underway, which readers can follow on the Libertarian National Committee’s 2025 Motions and Ballots spreadsheet.
Good point, Richard! Thanks for sharing.
There is nothing stopping another group of New Hampshire Libertarians from carrying out a ballot access petition for party status. The LP is not ballot-qualified in New Hampshire, so any group of people that can do that very difficult petition drive is free to do that work.