The quite short text of the opinions is found here.
The vote was 5-2 against the appeal to the Judicial Committee, which concluded: “The Libertarian National Judicial Committee hereby declines to void any decision of the LNC pursuant to this appeal, no majority to do so having been reached.”
Voting against the appeal were Seebeck, Montoni, Latham, Stratton, and Krawchuk. We quote from the Judicial Committee report:
Seebeck and Montoni: “… this appeal is simply dilatory in nature and should be ruled as such, with all requested relief denied. The only reason this appeal is being heard is because the Bylaws require it. … This is a dead horse that will not rise no matter how much it is flogged.”
Latham and Stratton “…The undersigned judicial committee members would hold that the challenged LNC actions do not contravene any section of the current Party bylaws. The reasoning set forth in Jonathan McGee’s brief on behalf of the respondent Libertarian National Committee is persuasive enough that the undersigned adopts it as our own….”
Mr. Krawchuk did not issue or join an opinion but votes not to void any decision of the LNC.
Voting in favor of the appeal were Tarnoff and Kinsella, who concluded:
“With regard to the footnote in RONR 61:2 that “It is also possible to adopt a motion of censure without formal disciplinary procedures,” we agree: a motion of censure may, indeed, be passed without formal disciplinary procedures, so long as it also complies with all the other principles laid out in the main text. In this case, the resolutions in question specify allegations of fact that could not be made other than by bringing formal charges against Ms. McArdle. We therefore hold the decisions of the LNC to adopt the two resolutions in question null and void. Other than as may have been addressed in this opinion, Appellant’s remaining requests for relief are either without merit or do not fall within the jurisdiction of this Committee to grant.”
Kinsella and Tarnoff were ridiculously wrong.