The US Constitution is the law of our land and guarantees each state a Republican form of government (Article IV, Section 4). A republican form of government is a type of government in which the citizens of a country have an active role in the affairs of the government.
With the establishment of our Constitution…we are a Constitutional Republic…a form of government in which a representative is elected by the people to govern over them, according to the rules established in the law of the land…our Constitution.
We understand in a Constitutional Republic, voters don't decide issues, voters decide who will decide issues. Therefore, we must elect representatives that best represent our values. So, we have joined a political organization or party that subscribes to our conservative ideology. We then collectively engage in our Party’s most central associational mission…the selection of a faithful nominee.
According to existing case law, a political party has a First Amendment right to limit its membership as it wishes, and to choose a candidate-selection process that will in its view produce the nominee who best represents its political platform. Indeed, the First Amendment affords “special protection” to “the process by which a political party selects a standard bearer who best represents the party’s ideologies and preferences.”
And this makes sense, as the nomination process is one that “often determines the party’s positions on the most significant public policy issues of the day, and even when those positions are predetermined it is the nominee who becomes the party’s ambassador to the general electorate in winning it over to the party’s views.”
In 2014, our state legislature launched an attack on our Republican Party…they passed SB54.
SB54 interferes with our Party’s established internal procedures…changes the kinds of nominees our Party produces…allows unwanted candidates to obtain our Party’s nomination…causes divisiveness within our Party…and reduces the loyalty of candidates and elected officials to our Party’s policies.
Put together, these consequences severely burden our Party’s ability to choose a loyal nominee and, ultimately, our right to define ourselves and deliver our message. Count My Vote (CMV) knew exactly what they were doing. They came after our Party to change its nomination process because they didn’t like the outcome our delegates delivered at our 2010 State Convention. CMV threatened our Party, that if we didn’t comply with their wishes to change our nomination process…they would change it for us…against our will. Our state Party stood up for our caucus convention system of delivering a nominee and said NO!
So, for reasons unknown and under the guise of negotiating a compromise between outside special interests and our State Republican Party…Senators Kurt Bramble and Todd Weiler sponsored SB54…changing our Party’s nomination process allowing candidates to use signatures rather than our caucus/convention delegate process to get on the primary ballot as a Republican.
WE sued…We lost for reasons that have nothing to do with the constitutional issues at hand. The 10th Circuit Court rejected our suit because it was a hypothetical case…meaning we had no injured party. Because SB54 allows the candidate to choose his/her path to nomination rather than the Party, the injured party had to be a candidate…not the Party. The Utah Republican Party spent $500,000 to discover this questionable detail. The constitutional rights of our Party were never considered because of this distinction. SB54’s constitutional foundation has NEVER been established.
SB54 allows for signature candidates to,
In effect, SB54 transformed our Party from a tight-knit community that chooses candidates deliberatively to a loosely affiliated collection of individuals who cast votes on a Tuesday in June.
The signature gathering path allowed for under SB54 violates our Party’s 1st Amendment Constitutional right of association by:
In sum, then, SB54 interferes with our Party’s internal procedures, changes the kinds of nominees our Party produces, allows unwanted candidates to obtain our Party nomination, causes divisiveness within our Party, and reduces the loyalty of candidates to our Party’s policies.
“When an association grows large, the risk the association’s central message will be lost amidst a sea of nominal members grows too—especially if the group must maintain an inclusive membership policy.”
Many organizations respond by leaving membership relatively open but restricting leadership to those who are “true believers,” so to speak, in the group’s mission. That is what our Party has tried to do. At its core, SB54’s sin lies in taking this option away. In so doing, the law constrains our Party’s ability to carry out its most central associational mission—its selection of a faithful nominee.
Forcing our Party, with an unconstitutional law, to accept nominees who circumvent our chosen nomination method by appealing to members at the fringes of our Party can “saddle” our Party with a nominee who is antithetical to the integrity of our Party and its long-term message. This is why we continue to fight with each other internally. Exactly the outcome CMV sought with their take over of our nomination process.
It has been 8 years since our Party was highjacked! Will you continue to fight back?
For more detailed information on the constitutional issues go to: november-10th-2021.html