|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Miscellaneous |
|
Nader wins motion on Physical Exclusion from Boston Debates Lawsuit |
Current rating: 0 |
by Theresa Amato(Nancy D-R/J.P. Schmidt)
Email: nancydietrich (nospam) juno.com (unverified!) |
11 Feb 2001
|
|
A Federal judge in Boston today denied a motion by the Commission on Presidential Debates to dismiss Green Party presidential nominee Ralph Nader's lawsuit. |
Nader Wins Motion on Physical Exclusion from Boston Debates
Lawsuit Against Presidential Debate Commission
Will Go Forward
Washington, D.C., February 8 – A federal judge in Boston today denied a
motion by the Commission on Presidential Debates to dismiss Green Party
presidential nominee Ralph Nader’s lawsuit challenging the Commission’s
use of police to exclude Nader’s attendance at the first presidential
debate on October 3rd at the University of Massachusetts. The lawsuit
against the Commission, its co-chairmen and security consultant, and
three state police officers, alleges that the defendants used threats
and intimidation to prevent Nader from entering a separate viewing
auditorium adjacent to the debate for which he had a transferable ticket
of admittance. The lawsuit contends that these acts occurred because of
Nader’s political views and were in violation both of his First
Amendment and Equal Protection rights under the U.S. Constitution and of
the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act. The defendants also prevented Nader
from appearing at a pre-scheduled interview with Fox News at a media
trailer at the debate site.
U.S. District Court Judge William Young said he was “troubled by
excluding someone because of their political views” and ruled that there
were no grounds to dismiss the lawsuit. The judge denied the Commission
on Presidential Debate’s motion to dismiss and the motions of the other
defendants in the case and “suggested picking a trial date,” according
to Boston-based Nader counsel Howard Friedman.
Throughout the campaign, Mr. Nader exposed the unfair practices of the
bipartisan, corporate-sponsored Commission on Presidential Debates and
the outrageous hurdles the Commission had established for presidential
candidates to be allowed to participate in broadcasts that reached tens
of millions of citizens. Nader said he was pleased by Judge Young’s
decision and “looked forward to the discovery process that will
illuminate this private corporation’s misuse of police power to further
the exclusionary abuses by the Republican and Democratic Parties who
created and control this Debate Commission.”
Prior to the complaint, the Commission had refused to avoid litigation
by extending a written apology and making a donation to the Appleseed
Center for Electoral Reform at Harvard Law School. The lawsuit was
filed on October 17, 2000 and announced from the site of the third
presidential debates in St. Louis where he was again excluded by the
Commission and where Nader intends to bring a similar suit. |
|
End the Election Infomercials! |
by Mike Lehman
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
11 Feb 2001
|
I hope that this trial would result in the end of the "debates" as they've been constituted to this point. They have been little more than exclusionary infomercials for the stagnation of the two-party system. Banning anything but real debates, instead of these journalistic puff pieces, would help open up real opportunities to talk about important issues.
Give 'em Hell Ralph |
