Kevin Gaughen, former Executive Director of the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania, has launched a campaign to file a derivative lawsuit to take control of the Libertarian Party. His current drive is to raise $10,000 for costs and obtain the legally-mandated fifty national party member as co-litigants. A bill of particulars against the current LNC may be seen at the following website: https://lncexposed.com. You can read much more about the suit at https://gogetfunding.com/lawsuit-to-regain-control-of-the-libertarian-party
There are several other groups advancing various alternative approaches to dealing with the Mises takeover of the Libertarian Party. The Keystone Party mentioned in Gaughen’s statement is one of them. There is also a classical liberal group with closely held plans. The Association of Liberty State Parties, superficially inactive, may be a third. A prominent non-Mises Libertarian has indicated to me that he is planning to run for National Chair, assuming that he can raise enough money.
In his fundraising statement for the derivative lawsuit, Gaughen writes:
Why we’re filing this lawsuit:
Our Libertarian Party, which activists worked for decades to build, is being intentionally destroyed.
In May of 2022, an organization known as The Mises PAC took over the Libertarian National Committee after multiple takeovers of state affiliates.
Since these takeovers, Mises-installed party leadership has repeatedly engaged in egregious unethical and corrupt behavior, has maligned libertarians across the world, and has misused donor funds.
Here’s an outline of their behavior since the takeover: https://lncexposed.com/
We believe that the group that took the Libertarian Party over is intentionally destroying its brand, its finances, and its ballot access.
How the lawsuit will work:
We intend to file what’s known as a “derivative lawsuit,” which is a special type of lawsuit typically filed when a non-profit corporation (like our political party) is being grievously mismanaged. A derivative suit allows members (like us) of the non-profit organization to regain control of the organization. To file this lawsuit, we will need a minimum of 50 dues-paying members of the Libertarian Party to sign on as plaintiffs. If you’re willing to be one of the plaintiffs, please send me a message to let me know!
What we are hoping to achieve:
Our hope is to bring this matter to court and have a judge see that the current Libertarian National Committee is malfeasant and is actively harming the organization’s finances, goodwill, and ballot access. Our goal is to obtain a court order to remove the offending committee members and to replace them with competent leaders who are not trying to harm the organization.
How your donation will be used:
Anything you donate (less transaction fees) will be used for lawsuit costs. Any money not used for lawsuit costs (for example if there’s a leadership change at the 2024 convention and the lawsuit becomes moot) will be donated for ballot access to either the Libertarian Party or the Keystone Party as the fundraiser organizer sees fit.
“In other words, he has no standing?”
That’s my understanding…. But one could easily imagine setting all the dominoes in place and having a group of interested parties with standing, who wouldn’t have done the prep work themselves but are willing to engage if the foundation is already poured, serving to fill that legal requirement. Getting those 50 individuals is a part of the operation, if I’m reading the fundraising pitch correctly, so Gaughen’s personal legal standing isn’t relevant to the viability of the attempt.
The recommendation to actively pursue the strengthening of an apparently crumbling organization in the possession of your enemy in the hopes of taking possession of it… it might seem valid if you contextualize it differently, but it’s easy to emphasize with those who would see that plan as counterproductive, and it’s not reasonable to assume 100% compliance of all interested parties when such significant differences in analysis exist. Dude’s gonna pursue his interpretation of his best interests, like a libertarian. Directing him (and like minded people) to take a different path that doesn’t sync with their read of the situation isn’t likely to bear fruit. It is what it is, and people are individuals: plan accordingly.
A reasonable person could prognosticate and see failure in this endeavor. Assuming a zero percent chance of success seems excessive though. Rejecting the plan for it’s unlikeliness also ignores positive effects that might derive from the case’s mere existence, independent of it’s success or failure. If those exist (I can see some from the outside*, **) then a binary view of the payoffs may be oversimplified to the point of inaccuracy.
“The role we play is […] to keep options open and provide alternative policies that can be adopted when people decide they need to make a change.” – Milton Friedman
*A huge chunk of LP National spending goes to cases against LP affiliates and other (L/li)bertarian groups. That’s budgeted money – it comes with an upper limit. If this challenge is unaddressed, the chance of its success goes way up. If it is fought, it detracts from the pool of money used to harass other libertarians, and so succeeds even if it fails.
** Got to keep your volunteers engaged. Making a cash donation hacks the brain into a deeper sense of commitment, and showing movement on regular, original plans increases the perceived (and most likely actual) viability of your operation.
“Kevin Gaughen isn’t, to my knowledge, a current LP member, so the recommendation for him to shift his focus onto membership drives / campaigning for Chair isn’t practical.”
In other words, he has no standing?
I agree with Kristin. The chances of success of this thing are zero and you should instead throw your resources into getting new members and taking control of counties, then to state.
Kevin Gaughen isn’t, to my knowledge, a current LP member, so the recommendation for him to shift his focus onto membership drives / campaigning for Chair isn’t practical.
If you look into the Out Of State voters in the ’22 LPPA convention and the LPPA bylaw/policy changes in the following year+ by that non-constituant elected board, you’ll see why a reasonable person could come to the conclusion that LPPA membership voting is well into “Banana Republic ‘Voting’ ” territory, and other techniques are required to ‘kick the bums out’. From that conclusion it naturally derives that National elections suffer Fruit of the Poison Tree, being done by an assemblage of state-affiliate-selected representatives.
Regardless of one’s take on the pragmatics or justifications, the actors and the incentives for a longform multispectrum conflict exist in PA. So that’s what we’re likely going to get. We can probably expect another decade or so of experimental probing attacks by a dedicated decentralized insurgency against the LPPA and LNC out of the Keystone State, until they either collapse, the MC loses dominance over them, or every individual who decided to keep fighting loses hope/focus.
Instead of wasting donor money, judicial time, and your time – make sure you fill your delegation to the National Convention. A judge is going to laugh in your face. If you don’t like who is ELECTED to represent you within your political party – recourse isn’t suing – it’s electing someone else. Just like in government. Instead of raising 10k to throw out the window – you should have been working all year to increase your membership and talking to states you are allied with about running for National Chair. I haven’t seen one single person announce or fundraise to run against Ms. McArdle. Maybe you should raise 10k for that instead of being divisive and hateful like the other 2 parties.