By 08/26/17 6:58am•
In June 2016, a class action lawsuit was filed against the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and former DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz for violating the DNC Charter by rigging the Democratic presidential primaries for Hillary Clinton against Bernie Sanders. Even former Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid admitted in July 2016, ““I knew—everybody knew—that this was not a fair deal.” He added adding that Debbie Wasserman Schultz should have resigned much sooner than she did. The lawsuit was filed to push the DNC to admit their wrongdoing and provide Bernie Sanders supporters, who supported him financially with millions of dollars in campaign contributions, with restitution for being cheated.
On August 25, 2017, Federal Judge William Zloch, dismissed the lawsuit after several months of litigation in which DNC attorneys argued that the DNC would be well within their rights to rig primaries and select their own candidate. “In evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are true—that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Clinton and sought to propel her ahead of her Democratic opponent,” the court order dismissing the lawsuit stated.
The order then explained why the lawsuit would be dismissed. “The Court must now decide whether Plaintiffs have suffered a concrete injury particularized to them, or one certainly impending, that is traceable to the DNC and its former chair’s conduct—the keys to entering federal court. The Court holds that they have not.” The court added that it did not consider this within its jurisdiction. “Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, possessing ‘only that power authorized by Constitution and statute.’”
The order reaffirmed that the primaries were tipped in Hillary Clinton’s favor, but the court’s authority to intervene in a court of law is limited.
“The Court thus assumes that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz preferred Hillary Clinton as the Democratic candidate for president over Bernie Sanders or any other Democratic candidate. It assumes that they stockpiled information useful to the Clinton campaign. It assumes that they devoted their resources to assist Clinton in securing the party’s nomination and opposing other Democratic candidates. And it assumes that they engaged in these surreptitious acts while publically proclaiming they were completely neutral, fair, and impartial. This Order therefore concerns only technical matters of pleading and subject-matter jurisdiction.”
At this time, it’s unclear if the attorneys who filed the class action lawsuit, Jared and Elizabeth Beck, will pursue other legal recourse regarding the 2016 Democratic primaries.
Source: The Observer
more recommended stories
- Who’s Going to Play The Superbowl In Minnesota?
The NFL just began but eyes.
- Producer Reveals What Makes His New Military Drama ‘Authentic’
Screenwriter Dean Georgaris had an interest.
- Dr. Oz Says Medical Marijuana Could Help Solve Opioid Addiction
Dr. Oz is one of.
- Netanyahu at the U.N.
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu said of.
- EPA Refuses To Send Staff Needed To Clean Most Toxic Waste Sites
Ethan Barton Some of the most.
- Earthquake Demolishes Mexico City Buildings, 42 Confirmed Dead
USGS TIM PEARCE Energy Reporter At.
- Best places to see graffiti in Toronto
BY: NADIA ZAIDI Growing up in.
- Millennials Not Replacing Older Business Owners, Stats Say
As older entrepreneurs retire, the.
- Barbaric acid attacks are becoming part of a growing gang problem in the UK
BY: NADIA ZAIDI When we think.
- After Seeing France’s Military Parade, Trump Wants An Even Bigger One
After seeing France’s military parade in.