He has so advised Harlos.
Writing on FaceBook, Keith Thompson, addressing LNC Parliamentarian Richard Brown, posted (slight reformatting relative to FaceBook):
Richard Brown – I don’t suppose you have an opinion as to whether such a motion is out of order? Caryn Ann’s argument is that the circumstances have changed enough to merit revisiting the joint fundraiser authorization with RFK Jr voicing support for former President Trump.
To which your Editor added:
Also, the motion being rescinded was passed by the LNC Executive Committee, not the LNC itself, so what vote is needed?
Richard Brown answered:
Keith Thompson – in my pretty firm opinion, the motion is not out of order, regardless of whether there have been changed circumstances. But, the fact that circumstances have changed adds credibility to the motion. I’ve already told CAH it is not out of order, but Angela has not asked, and I have not said anything to her.
He added:
Keith Thompson a motion can be renewed (made again) at any future session, regardless of whether there have been changed circumstances. There are no sessions with E-mail ballots, so I think under the bylaws renewing the motion at any time is in order. The bylaws put no limit on the ability of LNC members to submit email motions as long as they have the requisite number of co-sponsors. However, if you want to take the position that it’s not in order unless there have been changed circumstances, I believe that requirement has been met by the changed circumstances, namely, RFK suspending his campaign. He not only suspended his campaign, but has endorsed Trump.
So I think the motion is in order and is not dilatory. See 8:15 and 38:1 in RONR (12th ed).
Dictators can only be overthrown and maybe something criminal comes out.
Oddly, my reply to Walter Ziobro now posted on the moderation queue as a stand alone comment rather than as a reply. It was intended to be a reply to his reply to me.
Apparently, it’s unacceptable to answer this question in the logically consistent manner. Whether it can be appealed or not depends on who gets to decide whether an appeal is in order.
Would a motion to vacate the Chair be in order?
Is the chair on charge of ruling whether it’s in order?
Can a decision of the chair be appealed?
Apparently, it’s unacceptable to answer this question in the logically consistent manner. Whether it can be appealed or not depends on who gets to decide whether an appeal is in order.
Of course. See RONR 62:6 and if necessary, 62:9.
One of these days the McArdle may actually learn how to properly do parliamentary procedure.
Yes, the decision, either way, can be appealed. It is being appealed.