Federal Judge Rules Against Presidential Debate Commission

User avatar
adwinistrator
Posts: 677
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 7:29 pm
Location: NY

Federal Judge Rules Against Presidential Debate Commission

Post by adwinistrator » Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:22 pm

Looks like someone finally won a lawsuit against the CPD for excluding 3rd party candidates!

Independent Voter Network - BREAKING: Federal Judge Rules Against Presidential Debate Commission (2/1/17)
In a surprising decision, Judge Tanya S. Chutkan of the U.S. District Court in Washington D.C. ruled against the Federal Election Commission in the case of Level the Playing Field et al v. Federal Election Commission holding that the rules governing participation in the presidential debates were decided unfairly and arbitrarily.

Level the Playing Field (LPF), the organization that brought the suit, challenged the 501(c)(3) nonprofit status of the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) arguing it used unfair criteria to determine the participants of the 2016 presidential debates.

During oral arguments Lead Attorney for LPF, Alexandra Shapiro, argued the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) should lose its nonprofit status due to the unfair criteria used to determine eligibility in the presidential debates. The CPD, which is regulated by the Federal Election Commission, excluded non-major party candidates from participating in the debates in light of its 15 percent rule. According to the CPD, in order to participate in the presidential debates, a candidate must have “a level of support of at least 15 percent of the national electorate as determined by five selected national public opinion polling organizations…”

Judge Chutkan’s ruling in favor of LPF grants their motion for summary judgement and ordered the FEC to reconsider the allegations against the CPD within 30 days. The order states:

“The FEC is ORDERED to reconsider the evidence and allegations and issue a new decision consistent with this Opinion “within 30 days, failing which the complainant may bring, in the name of such complainant, a civil action to remedy the violation involved in the original complaint.”… The FEC is FURTHER ORDERED to reconsider the Petition for Rulemaking and issue a new decision consistent with this Opinion within sixty days.”

Okeefenokee
Posts: 12950
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:27 pm
Location: The Great Place

Re: Federal Judge Rules Against Presidential Debate Commission

Post by Okeefenokee » Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:30 pm

adwinistrator wrote:Looks like someone finally won a lawsuit against the CPD for excluding 3rd party candidates!

Independent Voter Network - BREAKING: Federal Judge Rules Against Presidential Debate Commission (2/1/17)
In a surprising decision, Judge Tanya S. Chutkan of the U.S. District Court in Washington D.C. ruled against the Federal Election Commission in the case of Level the Playing Field et al v. Federal Election Commission holding that the rules governing participation in the presidential debates were decided unfairly and arbitrarily.

Level the Playing Field (LPF), the organization that brought the suit, challenged the 501(c)(3) nonprofit status of the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) arguing it used unfair criteria to determine the participants of the 2016 presidential debates.

During oral arguments Lead Attorney for LPF, Alexandra Shapiro, argued the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) should lose its nonprofit status due to the unfair criteria used to determine eligibility in the presidential debates. The CPD, which is regulated by the Federal Election Commission, excluded non-major party candidates from participating in the debates in light of its 15 percent rule. According to the CPD, in order to participate in the presidential debates, a candidate must have “a level of support of at least 15 percent of the national electorate as determined by five selected national public opinion polling organizations…”

Judge Chutkan’s ruling in favor of LPF grants their motion for summary judgement and ordered the FEC to reconsider the allegations against the CPD within 30 days. The order states:

“The FEC is ORDERED to reconsider the evidence and allegations and issue a new decision consistent with this Opinion “within 30 days, failing which the complainant may bring, in the name of such complainant, a civil action to remedy the violation involved in the original complaint.”… The FEC is FURTHER ORDERED to reconsider the Petition for Rulemaking and issue a new decision consistent with this Opinion within sixty days.”


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

What are the mental acrobatics they're using to deny this is because they lost to Trump?
GrumpyCatFace wrote:Dumb slut partied too hard and woke up in a weird house. Ran out the door, weeping for her failed life choices, concerned townsfolk notes her appearance and alerted the fuzz.

viewtopic.php?p=60751#p60751

User avatar
adwinistrator
Posts: 677
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 7:29 pm
Location: NY

Re: Federal Judge Rules Against Presidential Debate Commission

Post by adwinistrator » Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:48 pm

Okeefenokee wrote:What are the mental acrobatics they're using to deny this is because they lost to Trump?
What the hell are you talking about? Not everything is about Trump. The CPD has been getting sued for years over the bullshit they pull.

It's a non-profit 501c3 founded by the former heads of the Democrats and Republicans, with the bi-partisan goals of making sure no one discusses issues that both party's are guilty of, and making sure no 3rd party candidate ever gets on that stage again.
Multiple lawsuits have been filed by third-party candidates challenging the CPD's policy of requiring a candidate to have 15% support in national polls to be included in presidential debates. While the lawsuits have challenged the requirement on a number of grounds, including claims that it violates Federal Election Commission (FEC) rules and that it violates anti-trust laws, none of the lawsuits has been successful.

During the 2000 election, Green Party candidate Ralph Nader filed a complaint with the FEC, on the basis that corporate contributions to the CPD violate the Federal Election Campaign Act. The FEC ruled that the CPD's funding sources did not violate the Federal Election Campaign Act and, in 2005, the D.C. Circuit Court declined to overrule the FEC.

In 2012, Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson filed an anti-trust lawsuit against the CPD, the Republican National Committee and the Democratic National Committee in D.C. Circuit Court citing the Sherman Act and claiming "restraint of trade" for denying competition to, for example, potentially receive the $400,000 annual presidential salary. The case was dismissed in 2014 due to lack of jurisdiction.

In September 2015, the Libertarian and Green parties – along with Johnson and Jill Stein – filed another lawsuit against the CPD, the Democratic National Committee, the Republican National Committee, Barack Obama, and Mitt Romney, charging violation of federal anti-trust laws. The case was dismissed in August 2016.

On October 5, 2016 a federal court judge agreed to hear oral arguments in a separate lawsuit. The suit challenges the CPD's nonprofit status on the grounds that it is funded by corporate money and favors the two major parties. The Internal Revenue Service allows 501(c)(3) organizations to engage in "voter education activities (including presenting public forums [...]) conducted in a non-partisan manner," provided the activities specifically do not "[favor] a candidate or group of candidates."

Okeefenokee
Posts: 12950
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:27 pm
Location: The Great Place

Re: Federal Judge Rules Against Presidential Debate Commission

Post by Okeefenokee » Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:59 pm

How many times has a judge ruled against?
GrumpyCatFace wrote:Dumb slut partied too hard and woke up in a weird house. Ran out the door, weeping for her failed life choices, concerned townsfolk notes her appearance and alerted the fuzz.

viewtopic.php?p=60751#p60751

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: Federal Judge Rules Against Presidential Debate Commission

Post by Speaker to Animals » Fri Feb 03, 2017 6:01 pm

I guarantee this will get pushed through the media as yet another Lost Cause myth to explain why the quasi-religious progressive "Right Side of History" was invalidated last November.

User avatar
adwinistrator
Posts: 677
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 7:29 pm
Location: NY

Re: Federal Judge Rules Against Presidential Debate Commission

Post by adwinistrator » Fri Feb 03, 2017 6:14 pm

Okeefenokee wrote:How many times has a judge ruled against?
I don't understand the question...

I posted a list of previous lawsuits, 3 of which made it to court, I don't know how many didn't.

Each of those 3 might have been ruled against, and appealed, and so on...

Each one has been a different lawsuit for a different reason... This time, it's challenging the 501c3 status. Basically, corporate sponsors favor exclusion of 3rd parties, as well as the goal of "educating voters".

User avatar
adwinistrator
Posts: 677
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 7:29 pm
Location: NY

Re: Federal Judge Rules Against Presidential Debate Commission

Post by adwinistrator » Fri Feb 03, 2017 6:16 pm

Speaker to Animals wrote:I guarantee this will get pushed through the media as yet another Lost Cause myth to explain why the quasi-religious progressive "Right Side of History" was invalidated last November.
I doubt it will get any coverage.

You either want the DNC/RNC to have complete control of the presidential debates, to pick their own rules, to their own advantage, or you don't...

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: Federal Judge Rules Against Presidential Debate Commission

Post by Speaker to Animals » Fri Feb 03, 2017 6:18 pm

adwinistrator wrote:
Speaker to Animals wrote:I guarantee this will get pushed through the media as yet another Lost Cause myth to explain why the quasi-religious progressive "Right Side of History" was invalidated last November.
I doubt it will get any coverage.

You either want the DNC/RNC to have complete control of the presidential debates, to pick their own rules, to their own advantage, or you don't...

They know it's over. The dems can't pull their shit together. They have become a terrorist organization at this point.

I don't think the duopoly even matters right now.

A new one will emerge when something replaces or reforms the democratic party as we know it.

Because, right now, the democratic party is dead outside of the cities.

Okeefenokee
Posts: 12950
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:27 pm
Location: The Great Place

Re: Federal Judge Rules Against Presidential Debate Commission

Post by Okeefenokee » Fri Feb 03, 2017 6:28 pm

And none of the challenges to the CPD have ever won. If Johnson had won his case last year, he might have taken votes away from Trump, or driven more votes to Clinton with his ridiculousness. That's where this is coming from.

I'm fine with opening up the debates, but I'm not so naive that I don't see why this is happening now, when there was never a gnat's fart of a chance for it to happen before Clinton lost.
GrumpyCatFace wrote:Dumb slut partied too hard and woke up in a weird house. Ran out the door, weeping for her failed life choices, concerned townsfolk notes her appearance and alerted the fuzz.

viewtopic.php?p=60751#p60751

Okeefenokee
Posts: 12950
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:27 pm
Location: The Great Place

Re: Federal Judge Rules Against Presidential Debate Commission

Post by Okeefenokee » Fri Feb 03, 2017 6:31 pm

I haven't clicked your link or read more than the headline.

Blind hail marry here.

What's the political bent of the judge in this decision?
GrumpyCatFace wrote:Dumb slut partied too hard and woke up in a weird house. Ran out the door, weeping for her failed life choices, concerned townsfolk notes her appearance and alerted the fuzz.

viewtopic.php?p=60751#p60751