We are in receipt of the following statement, which we believe to be authentic. We have contacted the signors, who may or may not choose to comment on the report.
Public Statement of Opposition to Litigation
From the Undersigned [See bottom of post] Members of the Libertarian National Committee May 5, 2026
On April 19, 2026, the Libertarian National Committee (“LNC”) voted to allocate funds for a legal retainer to pursue litigation against former LNC Chair, Angela McArdle. We, the undersigned members of the LNC, write to publicly oppose this decision. Our opposition is grounded not in personal loyalty, but in a serious concern for the health, stability, and future viability of the organization. The amount in dispute, approximately $49,600, is materially insignificant when compared to the cost of litigation. The following members are on record as supporting this litigation decision at various instances throughout this term:
Steven Nekhaila, Chair
Paul Darr, Vice Chair
Bill Redpath, Treasurer
Evan McMahon, Secretary
Sam Bohler, At-Large Representative
Doug Knebel, At-Large Representative
Robert Vinson, At-Large Representative
Jonathan McGee, Former Region 2 Representative
Matt Johnson, Region 2 Alternate Representative
Dustin Coffell, Region 3 North Representative
Keith Thompson, Region 3 South Representative
It has already been acknowledged by several of those listed above that legal expenses will meet or exceed that amount, with no realistic ceiling once proceedings begin. Even under optimistic assumptions, this course of action is unlikely to produce a net benefit to the Party, and an internal investigation conducted by a few of the above found this course of action would not be in the best interest of the organization. At a time when the organization faces financial strain, stagnant membership, and declining sustaining support, the decision to commit scarce resources to internal litigation raises fundamental questions about priorities and stewardship.
Donors and members expect progress, discipline, and strategic direction. They do not respond positively to prolonged internal conflict or costly legal disputes. Continued focus on such matters risks further erosion of confidence at a time when rebuilding it should be the primary objective. The organization has previously been advised, through independent review, that it is operating under significant financial and operational stress driven in part by internal disharmony, inconsistent leadership, and a lack of sustained strategic direction. This decision does not address those concerns. It reinforces them.
We are also concerned about the process by which this decision was reached. Documentation relevant to this matter was not consistently or comprehensively distributed in advance, and this reflects a broader pattern that has hindered informed decision-making since the most recent leadership transition. The underlying situation itself is more complex than has been publicly presented. The fundraising work at issue was not unprecedented in nature, and similar efforts had previously been approved and extended. At the time, no alternative strategy was put forward to address the Party’s financial needs.
It is also important to acknowledge that Ms. McArdle contributed significantly to the organization during a period of instability, including assuming executive-level responsibilities while working to stabilize operations, fundraising, and cultivated donor relationships that the current leadership discarded and have been hostile toward. The Party, under Ms. McArdle’s direction entered into a Joint Fundraising Committee that generated over $250,000 that kept the party afloat at a difficult time. In parallel, efforts were underway to develop a locally focused candidate strategy intended to expand the Party’s long-term viability. That initiative has since been discontinued, along with other forward-looking efforts, leaving a noticeable absence of strategic direction.
Since the leadership transition, the organization has not demonstrated meaningful progress in addressing its core challenges. Strategic initiatives have been halted, commitments have not been consistently maintained, and attention has shifted toward internal procedural matters as well as shutting down discussion and violating member rights access rather than outward growth.
We are further concerned that standards related to conflicts of interest have not been applied consistently, which undermines confidence in the objectivity of the processes that have led to this point.
Taken together, these factors suggest that the decision to pursue litigation is not part of a broader, coherent strategy to strengthen the Party. Rather, it risks diverting resources and attention away from the fundamental work required to stabilize and grow the organization.
The Libertarian Party exists to advance liberty, expand its influence, and offer a meaningful alternative to the political status quo. Achieving those goals requires disciplined use of resources, clear strategic direction, and a sustained focus on growth. This decision does not contribute to those objectives.
We respectfully but firmly oppose this course of action and urge the Party to redirect its efforts toward rebuilding membership, restoring donor confidence, and developing a clear and unified path forward.
The Undersigned Members of the Libertarian National Committee:
Travis Bost – At-Large Representative
Andrew Watkins – At-Large Representative
Andrew Chadderdon – Region 1 Representative
Aron Lam – Region 1 Representative
Austin Martin – Region 1 Alternate Representative
Bryce Thon – Region 1 Alternate Representative
Otto Dassing – Region 5 Representative
Paul Bracco – Region 5 Alternate Representative
Ben Weir – Region 6 Alternate Representative
Be First to Comment