Local
Attorney says invalidating Stein Club election would violate bylaws
Dispute over club takeover by influx of new members to be debated at special meeting Wednesday night
An attorney representing Martin Garcia, the president-elect of the Gertrude Stein Democratic Club, said a proposal by several club members to invalidate Garcia’s election and the election of two other officers aligned with Garcia would “flagrantly” violate the club’s bylaws.
Joseph E. Sandler, former general counsel to the Democratic National Committee, said in a Dec. 17 letter to Stein Club members that a call to overturn the election of Garcia and the two other officers by disqualifying 17 people who voted in the club’s Dec. 3 election would be a “breach of contract.”
He said a legal opinion by Donald Dinan, an attorney for the D.C. Democratic State Committee, whom the Stein Club’s current officers consulted about the election, incorrectly interpreted the bylaws.
Dinan stated in a Dec. 12 memorandum that the votes by 17 people could be invalidated if the addresses they gave were not correct or if it could be shown they did not qualify for the special reduced membership fee of $15 under which they joined the club in the week prior to the election.
Under club rules, eligibility for the special membership is restricted to students, senior citizens, and people with a “limited income.”
Dinan noted that the 17 votes cast by people whose membership is now under question is greater than the two to seven-vote margin in which Garcia and the other two officer candidates won the election. He said that since the vote was conducted by secret ballot, there is no way to determine which candidates received votes by a potentially disqualified member.
Thus Dinan concluded that if the Stein Club membership decides at the special meeting set for Wednesday night to disqualify a number of new members that exceeds the margin of victory for the three officers, the club has the authority to invalidate the election and call a new election.
Sandler, however, argues that the club’s bylaws do not provide any residency requirements for members and do not define “limited income” or whether a “student” should be full-time, part-time, or someone enrolled in a trade school rather than a college.
In addition, Sandler states in his letter, “The Dinan Memorandum… simply does not set forth any remotely reliable facts that would indicate that any of the 17 new members whose votes are being questioned were other than legitimate, dues-paying members of the Stein Club, under the Bylaws and Standing Rules of Procedure, at the time of the election.”
He said the club’s current officers and members should know that the club “is not free to ignore its own bylaws, or to make up new rules not found in the bylaws, to the detriment of certain members, whenever it seems convenient to do so.”
Dinan told the Blade that his memorandum was not a fact finding document and it was up to the club’s officers or members to make any determination on whether the 17 new members should be disqualified based on “irregularities” over their residential address or special membership qualification.
Sandler noted that Dinan cited specific claims of problems associated with the new members’ addresses and special membership status brought to Dinan’s attention by the club’s current officers. None of the issues about membership status raised could be grounds for disqualifying a member under the bylaws.
Sandler suggested in his letter that Garcia and the other two candidates who won election to the club’s vice presidential posts – Angela Peoples and Vincent Villano – would have grounds to take legal action against the club if their elections are overturned.
“[I]t is Mr. Garcia’s position that any decision to invalidate the December 3 election and/or to hold another election would be a flagrant violation by the Stein Club of its own bylaws, a violation that obviously directly injures Mr. Garcia, and that would constitute action ultra vires and in breach of contract,” he says in his letter.
“Ultra vires” is a Latin term used to say a corporation or entity went “beyond the powers” or authority they have to take a certain action, according to BusinessDictinary.com.
Garcia told the Blade on Tuesday that he and the other new officers have no intention of taking legal action against the club.
“That would not be beneficial to anyone involved in the club,” he said. “Our hope is to build unity and move forward with greater participation by folks who haven’t been involved.”
“After reading Mr. Sandler’s memo, I am more convinced that this special meeting is an attempt to push new members out of the election process,” Garcia said in a statement on Tuesday. “The Stein Club founders stood against the disenfranchisement of LGBT people, and I believe that, when presented with all the information, today’s Stein members will stand together at the special meeting and vote to move us forward as a united organization.”
District of Columbia
‘Sandwich guy’ not guilty in assault case
Sean Charles Dunn faced misdemeanor charge
A jury with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Thursday, Nov. 6, found D.C. resident Sean Charles Dunn not guilty of assault for tossing a hero sandwich into the chest of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent at the intersection of 14th and U streets, N.W. at around 11 p.m. on Aug. 10.
Dunn’s attorneys hailed the verdict as a gesture of support for Dunn’s contention that his action, which was captured on video that went viral on social media, was an exercise of his First Amendment right to protest the federal border agent’s participating in President Donald Trump’s deployment of federal troops on D.C. streets.
Friends of Dunn have said that shortly before the sandwich tossing incident took place Dunn had been at the nearby gay nightclub Bunker, which was hosting a Latin dance party called Tropicoqueta. Sabrina Shroff, one of three attorneys representing Dunn at the trial, said during the trial after Dunn left the nightclub he went to the submarine sandwich shop on 14th Street at the corner of U Street, where he saw the border patrol agent and other law enforcement officers standing in front of the shop.
Shroff and others who know Dunn have said he was fearful that the border agent outside the sub shop and immigrant agents might raid the Bunker Latin night event. Bunker’s entrance is on U Street just around the corner from the sub shop where the federal agents were standing.
“I am so happy that justice prevails in spite of everything happening,“ Dunn told reporters outside the courthouse after the verdict while joined by his attorneys. “And that night I believed that I was protecting the rights of immigrants,” he said.
“And let us not forget that the great seal of the United States says, E Pluribus Unum,” he continued. “That means from many, one. Every life matters no matter where you came from, no matter how you got here, no matter how you identify, you have the right to live a life that is free.”
The verdict followed a two-day trial with testimony by just two witnesses, U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent Gregory Lairmore, who identified Dunn as the person who threw the sandwich at his chest, and Metro Transit Police Detective Daina Henry, who told the jury she witnessed Dunn toss the sandwich at Lairmore while shouting obscenities.
Shroff told the jury Dunn was exercising his First Amendment right to protest and that the tossing of the sandwich at Lairmore, who was wearing a bulletproof vest, did not constitute an assault under the federal assault law to which Dunn was charged, among other things, because the federal agent was not injured.
Prosecutors with the Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. initially attempted to obtain a grand jury indictment of Dunn on a felony assault charge. But the grand jury refused to hand down an indictment on that charge, court records show. Prosecutors then filed a criminal complaint against Dunn on the misdemeanor charge of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers of the United States.
“Dunn stood within inches of Victim 1,” the criminal complaint states, “pointing his finger in Victim 1’s face, and yelled, Fuck you! You fucking fascists! Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!”
The complaint continues by stating, “An Instagram video recorded by an observer captured the incident. The video depicts Dunn screaming at V-1 within inches of his face for several seconds before winding his arm back and forcefully throwing a sub-style sandwich at V-1.
Prosecutors repeatedly played the video of the incident for the jurors on video screens in the courtroom.
Dunn, who chose not to testify at his trial, and his attorneys have not disputed the obvious evidence that Dunn threw the sandwich that hit Lairmore in the chest. Lead defense attorney Shroff and co-defense attorneys Julia Gatto and Nicholas Silverman argued that Dunn’s action did not constitute an assault under the legal definition of common law assault in the federal assault statute.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael DiLorenzo, the lead prosecutor in the case, strongly disputed that claim, citing various provisions in the law and appeals court rulings that he claimed upheld his and the government’s contention that an “assault” can take place even if a victim is not injured as well as if there was no physical contact between the victim and an alleged assailant, only a threat of physical contact and injury.
The dispute over the intricacies of the assault law and whether Dunn’s action reached the level of an assault under the law dominated the two-day trial, with U.S. District Court Judge Carl J. Nichols, who presided over the trial, weighing in with his own interpretation of the assault statute. Among other things, he said it would be up to the jury to decide whether or not Dunn committed an assault.
Court observers have said in cases like this, a jury could have issued a so-called “nullification” verdict in which they acquit a defendant even though they believe he or she committed the offense in question because they believe the charge is unjust. The other possibility, observers say, is the jury believed the defense was right in claiming a law was not violated.
DiLorenzo and his two co-prosecutors in the case declined to comment in response to requests by reporters following the verdict.
“We really want to thank the jury for having sent back an affirmation that his sentiment is not just tolerated but it is legal, it is welcome,” defense attorney Shroff said in referring to Dunn’s actions. “And we thank them very much for that verdict,” she said.
Dunn thanked his attorneys for providing what he called excellent representation “and for offering all of their services pro bono,” meaning free of charge.
Dunn, an Air Force veteran who later worked as an international affairs specialist at the U.S. Department of Justice, was fired from that job by DOJ officials after his arrest for the sandwich tossing incident.
“I would like to thank family and friends and strangers for all of their support, whether it was emotional, or spiritual, or artistic, or financial,” he told the gathering outside the courthouse. “To the people that opened their hearts and homes to me, I am eternally grateful.”
“As always, we accept a jury’s verdict; that is the system within which we function,” CNN quoted U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro as saying after the verdict in the Dunn case. “However, law enforcement should never be subjected to assault, no matter how ‘minor,’” Pirro told CNN in a statement.
“Even children know when they are angry, they are not allowed to throw objects at one another,” CNN quoted her as saying.
Maryland
Democrats hold leads in almost every race of Annapolis municipal election
Jared Littmann ahead in mayor’s race.
By CODY BOTELER | The Democratic candidates in the Annapolis election held early leads in the races for mayor and nearly every city council seat, according to unofficial results released on election night.
Jared Littmann, a former alderman and the owner of K&B Ace Hardware, did not go so far as to declare victory in his race to be the next mayor of Annapolis, but said he’s optimistic that the mail-in ballots to be counted later this week will support his lead.
Littmannn said November and December will “fly by” as he plans to meet with the city department heads and chiefs to “pepper them with questions.”
The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.
Democrats on Tuesday increased their majority in the Virginia House of Delegates.
The Associated Press notes the party now has 61 seats in the chamber. Democrats before Election Day had a 51-48 majority in the House.
All six openly gay, lesbian, and bisexual candidates — state Dels. Rozia Henson (D-Prince William County), Laura Jane Cohen (D-Fairfax County), Joshua Cole (D-Fredericksburg), Marcia Price (D-Newport News), Adele McClure (D-Arlington County), and Mark Sickles (D-Fairfax County) — won re-election.
Lindsey Dougherty, a bisexual Democrat, defeated state Del. Carrie Coyner (R-Chesterfield County) in House District 75 that includes portions of Chesterfield and Prince George Counties. (Attorney General-elect Jay Jones in 2022 texted Coyner about a scenario in which he shot former House Speaker Todd Gilbert, a Republican.)
Other notable election results include Democrat John McAuliff defeating state Del. Geary Higgins (R-Loudoun County) in House District 30. Former state Del. Elizabeth Guzmán beat state Del. Ian Lovejoy (R-Prince William County) in House District 22.
Democrats increased their majority in the House on the same night they won all three statewide offices: governor, lieutenant governor, and attorney general.
Narissa Rahaman is the executive director of Equality Virginia Advocates, the advocacy branch of Equality Virginia, a statewide LGBTQ advocacy group, last week noted the election results will determine the future of LGBTQ rights, reproductive freedom, and voting rights in the state.
Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin in 2024 signed a bill that codified marriage equality in state law.
The General Assembly earlier this year approved a resolution that seeks to repeal the Marshall-Newman Amendment that defines marriage in the state constitution as between a man and a woman. The resolution must pass in two successive legislatures before it can go to the ballot.
Shreya Jyotishi contributed to this article.
-
District of Columbia24 hours ago‘Sandwich guy’ not guilty in assault case
-
Sports1 day agoGay speedskater racing toward a more inclusive future in sports
-
Celebrity News3 days agoJonathan Bailey is People’s first openly gay ‘Sexiest Man Alive’
-
Opinions4 days agoNew York City mayoral race gets nasty but Mamdani will win

