Federal Laws Proving Binding of Delegates Is Illegal!Submitted by RnPl2012 on Wed, 05/30/2012 - 06:15
The federal laws are as follows:
11 CFR 100.2(e): ( http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2011-title11-vol1/xml/CFR-2... ) Defining a national convention as a "Federal Election" for the purpose of electing a candidate for federal office. Which states:
“(e) Caucus or Convention. A caucus or convention of a political party is an election if the caucus or convention has the authority to select a nominee for federal office on behalf of that party.”
42 USC 1971 - Sec. 1971. Voting rights: ( http://us-code.vlex.com/vid/sec-voting-rights-19251307 ) Which states:
"No person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall intimidate, threaten, coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person to vote or to vote as he may choose, or of causing such other person to vote for, or not to vote for, any candidate for the office of President"
The Republican party is a private party. A legal voter/delegate is also considered a private party. These private parties are separately governed by numerous federal and state laws (depending on their location).
The Republican National Convention; however, is a federal election made up of multiple private parties which serve to nominate a candidate for the office of the Presidency (which is a federal office position).
The Republican National Convention itself is a federal election bound by federal laws.
These two federal laws alone SHOULD prove that no state law or private party rule can force an individual to vote against their own free will for any federal election. Period!
*** EDIT: ***
After receiving some insightful legal information, I have concluded the following:
Under 42 USC 1971(e) the word “vote” includes all action necessary to make a vote effective.
It appears that it would be easy for one to argue in court that any "threat, coercion, or intimidation" they incurred; interfered with ones right to "vote as he may choose" and undermined their effectiveness to "vote for, or not to vote for, any candidate for the office of President".
Delegate binding and affidavit coercion could be argued as undermining ones "effectiveness to 'vote'."
This undermining of ones "effectiveness to 'vote'", has been argued and won in multiple supreme court cases. The following is one of the latest cases:
Morse v. Republican Party of Va. - 517 U.S. 186 (1995) ( http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/94-203.ZO.html )
*** Edit: Again ***
The following should help squelch some of those who disagree with the reality of these facts:
The purpose of stating the first law (11 CFR 100.2(e): http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2011-title11-vol1/xml/CFR-2... ) is to point out the fact that the federal government recognizes a national convention as a federal election.
Here's even more proof the FEDS consider a national convention a federal election: "FOOTNOTES: 1. A national nominating convention is considered a federal election. 11 CFR 100.2(e)." ( http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/delegate.shtml#1 )
I'm pretty sure its safe to say that 11 CFR 100.2(e) defines a national convention as a federal election when the Federal Election Commission defines a national convention as a federal election and THEY reference to 11 CFR 100.2(e) as proof that a national convention is considered a federal election.
See also: 2 USC 431 - Definitions - (1)(B),( http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/2/431 ): (1) The term “election” means— (B) a convention or caucus of a political party which has authority to nominate a candidate;
The second law (42 USC 1971 - Sec. 1971. Voting rights: http://us-code.vlex.com/vid/sec-voting-rights-19251307 ) simply states federal voting rights laws.
Federal elections must abide by federal election laws (CFR Title 11 - Federal Elections: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2012-title11-vol1/xml/CFR-2... ) and must uphold federal voting rights laws (42 USC 1971: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1971).
National conventions are federal elections and must abide by these laws. Or else... haha
The logic behind my research and conclusions is not legal rocket science; it is common sense. haha
*** Edit: Again. Again.. ***
My common sense just kicked in again:
If these two laws were to be cited and argued in court; a court would find that the argument of defining a national convention as a "federal" election for the purposes of being regulated by "federal" voting rights laws would be irrelevant.
The reason they would find this irrelevant is because 42 USC 1971 – Voting Rights already states that an "election" where citizens “vote" for a "candidate for the office of President” (whether it’s defined as a "federal" election or not) falls under the jurisdiction of 42 USC 1971 – Voting Rights.
National conventions have citizens/delegates who “vote" for a "candidate for the office of President”; therefore, they are bound by 42 USC 1971 – Voting Rights.
Any way you look at it; binding of delegates is illegal.
RnPl2012 Over and out!