One possible way to eliminate the issue of private V public is to look at the contract angle. Contracts are legally enforceable without regard to the public or private status of the parties to the contract.
The GOP made an offer to the public. They said that anyone who followed their rules would be allowed to become a delegate and possibly achieve party leadership.
Thousands of citizens accepted the offer. Offer plus acceptance equals contract, enforceable by law.
The delegate candidates spent their hard earned money and limited time in good faith to follow the rules. Some of them succeeded. However, the GOP allegedly refused to carry out its part of the deal.
In another words, the cries of the delegates are that the GOP breached the contract. They also cry about fraud in there, somewhere, as well as the assaults and other tricks used to avoid the GOP's duty of having to fulfill their contracts.
Even though breech of contract might look like a good legal avenue to pursue, I would leave it up to the lawyers to determine the best grounds for their legal action. They are the pros who make a living at this game.
I am not a lawyer but I have had a long time keen interest in litigation tactics. My quick, cursory reading of the lawsuit indicated to me that the lawyers found a federal regulation which might be the best way to pursue this case. The part of the code that I read eliminates the argument of private V public, so it does not appear to be an issue in this situation, even with a federal claim.
By the way, natural law from God and "rule of law" is not necessarily enforced by the courts. It was part of the original intent of the Constitution but it is not the driving force anymore. But, thankfully, contract law is still enforced by the courts.
Supporting a Needed Tool for Government Feedback:
A Citizen-Operated Legal System.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: