When a group of shady characters filed a lawsuit against the Republican Party of Virginia asserting that it is right and proper to have Democrats determine the outcome of local Republican Party operations, some of the names involved were hardly surprising. Jim Rich, for one, has been amazingly consistent over the years in demonstrating that he believes Democrats should select who leads Republican party units and who their nominees for elected office should be. But why would the Convention of States Project be involved here?
Scott Russell was the person who Jim Rich, with the help of Fauquier County Democrats, managed to get selected as Chairman of the Fauquier County Republican Committee during a convention that was later thrown out in a decision by the First District Republican Committee which was then upheld by the Republican State Central Committee. Russell, Rich and two others then joined together in a lawsuit filed in Fauquier County Circuit Court, naming the Republican Party of Virginia and the First District Committee as defendants and demanding that the decision of the State Central Committee be overturned by the court, that portions of the Republican Party Plan be deemed unlawful, that the Republican Party of Virginia pay these plaintiffs money, and provide “additional relief” as the court decides is proper.
This same Scott Russell is also the Executive Director of the Committee of States Project which seeks to convene a constitutional convention that would amend the United States Constitution in order to reverse federal encroachments on individual liberties, such as those guaranteed under the First Amendment. Freedoms such as the right of individuals to assemble for political purposes free of government interference, such as state or federal courts inserting themselves into the internal operations of these free associations of individuals, rewriting their rules, overturning their decisions, and stealing their property to be redistributed to favored entities or individuals they more highly favor.
Consider this: if the Convention of States Project is successful in obtaining precisely the outcome they say they want from a Constitutional Convention, one of the effects would be to nullify the very same decision of the courts that their own Executive Director sued for while he was employed by the Convention of States Project.
If Scott Russell actually believes that what he is trying to do to the Republican Party of Virginia is right, one really has to wonder if the objective of the Convention of States Project has anything to do at all with protecting our liberties, or whether it’s really an effort to allow government to encroach even further on our Constitutionally-protected liberties. It’s not as if Michael Farriss could possibly be unaware of what’s going on - I’ve been told several individuals have already contacted him about this only to get strangely legalistic dismissals of their concerns. Farriss cannot also claim to be ignorant of the issue this lawsuit rears, as he’s arguably one of the best Constitutional lawyers in the country and it cannot conceivably escape his notice that the basic premise of this lawsuit of which his Executive Director is a plaintiff is utterly and entirely at odds with the publicly stated goals and intentions of the Convention of States Project. Farriss is aware of the issue at hand, has considered the implications, and through his inaction has sent a very clear message to anyone who values the liberties so important to the foundation of our country that they were the first mentioned in the Bill of Rights that they can pound sand.
If this is the group that intends to shepherd us through the perilous process of re-writing our Constitution and their professional staff, with the assent of their leader, is brazenly attacking the very liberties it claims to value so highly, have we any reason to be terrified of the notion of a Convention of States?
UPDATE: I’m told Russell will be dropping his name from the lawsuit because of the mounting criticism. While that might be a good PR move for the Convention of States , it doesn’t do anything to allay concerns about whether the leadership at the Convention of States Project actually values the constitutionally-protected rights they claim to be working to defend.
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
Leave a Reply