Court to hear oral arguments in DNC suit

Wouldn't this be interesting?

A federal appeals court has agreed to hear oral arguments from a Hillsborough County man seeking to have Florida's Democratic presidential preference primary vote counted.

Vic DiMaio, a party activist in Hillsborough County, sued the Democratic National Committee over its decision to strip Florida of its delegates because its Jan. 29 primary was earlier than party rules allow.

Federal district court judge Richard A. Lazzara harshly dismissed the case in October, saying the suit was so flawed he wouldn't even let DiMaio amend it and try again. He said prior court rulings had made clear that political parties, as private entities, can set their own rules in selecting presidential candidates.

Now the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta is saying, not so fast. It wants to hear more after reading written pleadings. Federal appellate courts don't always take oral arguments.

"It doesn't tell me we're going to win," said Michael Steinberg, a Social Security lawyer who serves as chairman of the Hillsborough County Democratic Executive Committee and is respresenting DiMaio. "It tells me that they're going to make some sort of precedential ruling."

--Bill Varian, Times Staff Writer

Comments

Apparently the Clintons will stop at nothing to steal this nomination.

A look at the 11th Circuit

12 Active Judges, 5 Seniors
7 appointed by a GOP
5 appointed by a Dem, 4 of which by Bill Clinton alone

Of the Senior justices,
2 Dem
3 GOP

Interesting to see how they rule, though I think I can bet on how at least 4 of them will rule.

[Gilbert]

When the Democratic National Committee, explained the consequences of thier choice and they proceeded, the precedent was set right then! To try and do and end-around in this eleventh hour serves them right! Come on Democrats, the rules were in place for a reason and they chose to disregard the NATIONAL Committee's stern warning so too bad. This is the chaos that will hopefully cause you all (Dummycrats) to lose the election. Screw up and look to the courts to give you an excuse. It will be even more horse manure coming from you all with the looming Super Delegate Clinton/Obama debacle forthcoming! As a Republican, I cannot wait! By the way, "John McCain for President".

[New Democrat]

I am sick of hearing this BS about Clinton trying to steal this election. Anyone who is saying that needs to pull their head out of a certain hole. The Democratic Voters of Fl had NO SAY AT ALL about when the primary voting date was set. So why the hell should they be disenfranchised when they had NO CONTROL at all over when they could vote. I just switched from Republican to Democrat this year and if this is the way they do things in this party, I am going to switch to independent. To hear Obama say that he is all for taking away the votes of people that HAD NO CONTROL over when they were allowed to vote is disgusting and makes him just another piece of crap like Bush and Harris. His view and stance on this makes him no better than the Republicans who stole the 2000 election. So maybe someone can tell me what is the difference between Obama and them? Because right now, he does not want the votes of innocent people counted because it would hurt him in the election. And it does not take a genius to know he would be screaming at the top his lungs if this was reversed. How F'ing disgusting.
And BTW I voted for Edwards and am not a big fan of Clinton, but I am huge fan of doing things right and what the DNC is doing is BS.

Florida's votes should count, Clinton or no Clinton. The DNC does not have the authority to remove the voting rights of Floridians.

Thank you Senator Ring

11:47 and the loser blogger at 2:44am - um, when you find a constitutional right to have a PRIMARY vote "count", wake me up - but you democrats haven't heard of that thing called a constitution have you

[Patri]

I think it's despicable that Michael Steinberg, the newly posted Chair of the Hillsborough County Democratic Executive Committee, and Vic DiMaio would file this suit.

The courts should not be involved in this, firstly. Secondly, the rules of engagement for the Democratic Primary in Florida were set in stone when the (heavily Republican) legislature in Tallahasse changed the date to January, knowing full well what the DNC would do with respect to Fla's Dem delegates. Many Dems that I know did not vote for a Presidential candidate. They went to the polls to try to vote down the property tax ammendment but abstained from voting for a candidate. Moreover, none of the candidates were able to campaign here -- who ever heard of a political race like that?

I see this as a smoke and mirrors means to scare up some delegates for Hillary to brighten the chances of her getting the nomination, albeit it likely won't do her too much good once she hopefully gets creamed in TX and OH next week. What's more, at least to date, it's certainly not the will of the people that she get it.

She's an easily defeated candiate in the general, so naturally the GOPers love this stuff. McCain-cient and his One Hundred Years War philosophy don't stand a chance against the likes of a man who will go down in history as a truly great leader: Barack Obama.

Patri,
I have heard some spin in my life, but yours certainly takes the prize.

Patri,

The lawsuit was filed in August, 2007. Both the DNC and the FDP were named. It asked the court to declare whether the actions of the DNC were constitutional. If they were, it asked the court to direct the FDP to comply with the DNC's directive to conduct an alternate primary election or caucus.

When the appeal was filed, all national polls indicated Clinton was a lock for the nomination.

The purpose of the lawsuit was to establish a precedent for future elections. We assumed that in this election, one candidate would be the presumed nominee and the Florida and Michigan delegates would be seated at the convention despite the earlier ruling of the DNC.

If this suit was filed last week, or the appeal was filed last week, your argument would have more merit, but both were filed long ago, well before I was elected chair of the HCDEC.

Hopefully the outcome of this case will not determine the Democratic nominee, but if it does, it was not initiated or appealed for that purpose.

Michael Steinberg

Michael - how do you suggest that a FAIR alternate primary or caucus be conducted at this point?

I haven't heard one peep from any Democratic Party or elected official who admits that this is at least partially their fault.

The idea that we are FLORDIA and can bully people around was a dumb strategy.

The Democrats have created a situation that cannot be fixed. There is no solution. They strpped Floridians of their voting privileges. The cowardly presidential candidates voluntarily pledged not to campaign here. I am trying to think how they could have created a worse situation. I can't. And they want to run the country?

On the issue of whether there should be a legal right to have our primary votes count, consider that the vote was on the most public of issues--who will be the nation's next elected chief magistrate.

Consider also that it is against the law to decide not to count votes because of voter's skin color, religion or nation of origin. Why should it be legal to ignore votes based on what state a citizen lives in? Is that somehow different? Aren't they still citizens?

Most of the comments above show viewpoints through the perspective of the horse race. You miss the point--how we pick our leaders is more important than who they might be at any particular moment.

The only real link between citizens and government is the vote. If the vote can be canceled or halved by anybody, then we aren't a democracy anymore--we're something else. Is that acceptable to you? Is that what you send your kids overseas to fight for?

Regardless of the offered rationale, no American voter should ever be told that he doesn't count. We can't carry on this "the individual is important in America" theme if we allow ourselves to cancel each other's vote.

We ought to pay attention to how our elected leaders react to the cancellation of millions of our votes.

We ought to be offended by the opportunists to cooperated with our disenfranchisement and will seek our support in November.

11:47 - that's silly. You don't tell the candidates they aren't allowed to campaign but it's ok... there won't be any delegates and then go WHAM surprise - there really are delegates.

FL voters should count but it requires a second primary and/or caucuses in which all candidates are permitted to campaign for a reasonable period of time prior to the election.

If this election has shown us anything, it's that candidates (especially Obama) can move 20+ digits in the polls within a few weeks of campaigning in a state. Since FL had no campaigning it's impossible to say how the vote would've gone had the DNC not kept the candidates out.

11:47 - that's silly. You don't tell the candidates they aren't allowed to campaign but it's ok... there won't be any delegates and then go WHAM surprise - there really are delegates.

FL voters should count but it requires a second primary and/or caucuses in which all candidates are permitted to campaign for a reasonable period of time prior to the election.

If this election has shown us anything, it's that candidates (especially Obama) can move 20+ digits in the polls within a few weeks of campaigning in a state. Since FL had no campaigning it's impossible to say how the vote would've gone had the DNC not kept the candidates out.

09:21 AM time to wake up.
Spending time and money to hold a vote that is not counted seems to me to be argument enough. If you find something in the constitution that calls this a normal activity please post it.

You can go back to sleep now.