[EL] Dem Nat Committee sues Russia; link to complaint

[Steve Hoersting]

I have not read this, either. I will eventually.

Still, I am willing to venture into this conjecture now; willing to risk
the egg on the face.

I think this is less a vote-of-no-confidence in the Mueller gambit; now
equally the S.D.N.Y. gambit.

I think this is as much, or even more, to do with Dan Backer's (or allies
of Backer's) lawsuit against the Clinton Committee and several Democratic
Party Committees for flouting the strictures of the *McCutcheon* opinion --
because THAT is a viable claim.

Message to the powers that be?: Don't let's suppose the DNC will be the
only National Committee producing documents heading into the 2018 and 2020
election cycles. Because if we draw Kimba Wood (or any other like-minded
judge) in our Manhattan forum, we'll get the documents from the RNC that
we're after.... So, somebody on First Street had better talk to this
small-time Committee-to-Defend-the-Whatever-it's-called....

Other message to the powers that be?: Don't suppose Hillary is going to
take-on pariah status -- vis-a-vis the Obama coalition -- both within the
Democratic party and internationally for wrecking the Party and putting it
behind the Eight Ball; not while there's a viable campaign against
Trump-Russia collusion to press aggressively in the Courts and press.

In sum: Mark asks if this is a stunt. Perhaps. But, from the Clinton
point-of-view, it is quite likely a stunt for survival; for "reputational"
viability and/or historical "viability" (not so much for electoral
viability).

As I said, I am spit-balling. Still, this take is as worth considering as
any at this point in time -- and maybe more so.

Note also: The lawsuit appears to be brought by a shop that did NOT write
the Democratic JFC Agreement, though I don't know.

Steve Hoersting


On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 2:28 PM, Mark Scarberry <
mark.scarberry at pepperdine.edu> wrote:

> It's been a while (35 years!) since I handled a case involving the Foreign
> Sovereign Immunities Act, 28 USC 1602-1611, but isn't it quite clear that
> the FSIA blocks the action against the Russian government? Perhaps
> Richard's blog or other commentaries have dealt with this question. The
> complaint cites 1605(a)(5) & (a)(2)), but "discretionary acts" are not
> within the exception in 1605(a)(5), nor could these actions reasonably be
> classified as "commercial" under 1603(d) for purposes of 1605(a)(2). Am I
> missing something? Is the naming of Russia a stunt?
>
> Mark
>
> Prof. Mark S. Scarberry
> Pepperdine Univ. School of Law
>
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 10:45 AM, Fredric Woocher <fwoocher at strumwooch.com
> > wrote:
>
>> I think they are going to need more Doe Defendants than 1 - 10.
>>
>>
>>
>> Fredric D. Woocher
>>
>> Strumwasser & Woocher LLP
>>
>> 10940 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 2000
>>
>> Los Angeles, CA 90024
>>
>> fwoocher at strumwooch.com
>>
>> (310) 576-1233
>>
>> *From:* Law-election [mailto:law-election-bounces at d
>> epartment-lists.uci.edu] *On Behalf Of *Richard Winger
>> *Sent:* Friday, April 20, 2018 10:24 AM
>> *To:* Election Law Listserv
>> *Subject:* [EL] Dem Nat Committee sues Russia; link to complaint
>>
>>
>>
>> My blog post has a link to the complaint
>>
>>
>>
>> http://ballot-access.org/2018/04/20/democratic-national-comm
>> ittee-sues-russia-trump-campaign-and-others-over-2016-election/
>>
>>
>>
>> Richard Winger 415-922-9779 PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>



-- 
Stephen M. Hoersting
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180420/d795aa4c/attachment.html>