Legal Commentary

Saturday's Argument Schedule for Florida and Michigan

By Jeralyn

McClatchy reports:

Party officials and challengers will make presentations first Saturday, and the campaigns will then make their cases. Former Michigan Gov. Jim Blanchard and Arthenia Joyner, a Tampa, Fla., civil rights activist, will present Clinton's case, while Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Fla., and former Rep. David Bonior, D-Mich., will argue Obama's side. Levin is also expected to speak.

Mark Bubriski, a spokesman for the Florida party, said that while Democrats there want all delegates seated, Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., who will present the state's case, is expected to use a conciliatory tone. According to Bubriski, Nelson is likely to argue, "We want this to be over. Our goal is that this is the day to end it, to move on, to put this entire dark chapter behind us."

After hearing the arguments, the committee plans to break for a private lunch, followed by an afternoon of deliberations.

Legal arguments are not likely to hold sway tomorrow. Why? [More....]

"Everyone on that committee has a real institutional concern for the Democratic Party," said committee member Donald Fowler, a Clinton backer and former party chairman.

"We're not the Supreme Court. We're a political organization," said Allan Katz, a Tallahassee, Fla., city official who backs Obama. [My emphasis]

Given that this is not a courtroom, it makes sense to me the Clinton campaign is not going to raise technical legal arguments about rules but concentrate on arguments that might have stronger appeal to the committee. Common sense arguments.

Hillary isn't conceding that only half the delegates should be seated or that all the delegates should be seated with only 1/2 vote each. She's arguing all the votes should count and all the delegates should be seated. She's arguing the DNC was wrong to punish the 2.3 million voters who came out to vote for her. It's wrong to give Obama delegates that voted uncommitted or voted for her. The uncommitted should remain uncommitted until it's time for them to vote at the convention.

Hillary should get her delegates and her votes per the January primaries. That's her argument.

As a fallback, which is wise in my opinion since the media has convinced everyone, including me, that the committee is unlikely to count and seat both delegations full-strength, she's arguing that for Florida, seating all the delegates with 1/2 vote is better than seating half the delegates with a full vote. It's more inclusive, will result in fewer harsh feelings, and will be better for the party in November.

Big Tent Democrat strongly disagrees and thinks Hillary should make other arguments. If they were in court, perhaps so.

But for tomorrow, I'm willing to trust in Hillary's strategy. They know the committee members and the lay of the land. If they've decided not to advance an argument, it's not because they are conceding or admitting it is wrong, but because they believe it's not viable -- that strategically it's not the right move for tomorrow and it isn't likely to work as well as their other arguments in front of this political committee that is not a court.

I read it as they may be very good arguments, just like BTD thinks they are, but they are not the right arguments for Hillary at tomorrow's hearing.

BTD and I will just have to disagree on this one.

Full post as published by TalkLeft on May 30, 2008 (boomark / email).