Will the real elephant please stand up?

Did you hear?  Last night at the Hoboken Democratic Committee meeting there was an elephant in the room.   

And I don't mean Karen Nason.   Yes, she showed up.  But there was a different kind of elephant there, the kind that everybody sees but pretends not to.   

NASON GETS THE BOOT

The meeting was held downstairs at the Hoboken Bar and Grill. Nason -- a Republican-- wanted to go to the meeting, called Stick Romano and he offered to bring her. 

Why would she want to go to a Dem Committee meeting?

"As a Republican, I'd love to work together with Democrats" she said, "This is what it's supposed to be about. Moving forward, not moving backwards."

So she arrived at the meeting, before Stick.  Karen told me that almost immediately she was asked to leave by the Hoboken Democratic Committee Chair, Tiffanie Fisher.  Fisher told her:

"You are not allowed here.  You're not a Democrat... we have by-laws." 

The manager followed  Karen upstairs and said, "I'm running this place. You come right back down, you're my guest."

Nason went back, and Fisher told her again:  "You have to leave...."

The by-laws, huh? These questions come to mind.

• Do the Hoboken Dem Committee by-laws support throwing members of the public out of a meeting held in a public venue on any basis? 

• Do the by-laws support Committee members who advocate for a candidate in a non-partisan election where that advocacy runs contrary to electing a Democrat to office? 

GA has reviewed the Hoboken Democratic Committee by-laws (embedded below) for the answers. (I am not a lawyer, so cut me some slack.)

Question #1

DO THE BY-LAWS SUPPORT EJECTING MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC OUT OF A MEETING HELD IN A PUBLIC VENUE?
Answer:  
ARTICLE V,  "Meetings" doesn't answer the question about not who may (or may not) attend "Special Meetings" called by the Chair.  There is nothing addressing whether Democrats who are not committee members or any member of the public or by invited guest may attend. There is also nothing specifying where meetings can or cannot be held.

By convening a political meeting in a public venue, is it constitutional to force members of the public to leave because of their political affiliation?  It would seem to me the right of free speech for everyone, and without prejudice, prevails. 

Was the meeting noticed properly as "closed to the public"?  

Was the owner who donated his space aware that the meeting was "closed to the public"?

 There is nothing wrong with holding a "members only" meeting.  But notice it properly, and hold it in a private setting.

GA is no lawyer but I do not see anything in the by-laws that supports throwing anyone-- of any race, religion, or political affiliation-- out of a meeting held in a public place.

Question #2

DO THE BYLAWS SUPPORT INDIVIDUALS WHO ADVOCATE IN A NON-PARTISAN ELECTION WHERE THAT ADVOCACY RUNS CONTRARY TO ELECTING A DEMOCRAT TO OFFICE? 
Answer: NO!  

Article 2, Section 3:  

"Nothing within this section shall be interpreted to prevent an individual from exercising political expression in his or her personal capacity as a voter and every accord shall be made to respect such privacy provided no advocacy is made in his or her official capacity to support a candidate in a nonpartisan election or where such advocacy would run contrary to electing a Democrat to office."

-BY-LAWS OF THE HOBOKEN DEMOCRATIC COMMITTEE
 (Adopted pursuant to Section 19:5-2 of the Revised Statutes of State of the State of New Jersey)

The Preamble:

"We pledge to do all we can to nominate and assist in the election of Democratic candidates for public office; adopt and promote statement of policy; assist national, state, county and locate Democratic Party organizations and candidates in their candidacies and education of the voters; raise and disburse monies needed for the successful operation of the Democratic Party; establish standards and rules of procedure to afford all members of the Democratic Party full, timely and equal opportunities to participate in decisions concerning the selection of candidates, the formulation of policy, and the conduct of other Party affairs, without prejudice on the basis of sex, race, age, color, creed, national origin, religion, economic status, sexual orientation, ethnic identity or physical disability, and further, to promote fair campaign practices and the fair adjudication of disputes; work with Democratic public officials at all levels to achieve the objectives of the Democratic Party..."

So I ask, what was the real elephant in the room last night?

Was it Karen Nason, or a member of the Executive Committee  who brazenly violated the most basic mission of the Hoboken Democratic Committee by-laws ("We pledge to do all we can to nominate and assist in the election of Democratic candidates for public office) and has not been held accountable by Dem Committee members.

BY-LAWS OF THE HOBOKEN DEMOCRATIC COMMITTEE by GrafixAvenger on Scribd