PROOF 1.2
DNC MOU Violation

PROOF: Organizers Excluded Racial Caucuses Through Selective Non-Formation

Violation: By failing to form 75% of the mandated racial diversity caucuses while simultaneously forming others and interfering in the process, organizers violated the MOU's requirement to 'fully implement' the caucus creation process. This selective failure was a strategic act of disenfranchisement that rendered the committee's formation illegitimate.
Stakes: Three of the four mandated racial minority communities were disenfranchised from the committee's formation, proving that the process was not merely flawed, but strategically engineered to exclude specific groups from participation.
Evidence Strength:
4 facts, 2 axioms

The Axioms (The Rules)

1

The 2020 MOU's stated purpose was 'to create a process to establish new, and assist currently existing, diversity caucuses'. Primary Source

2020 MOU between WVDP and DNC RBC, p. 1

2

The MOU mandated that the State Party 'fully implement... the creation of any new... caucuses.' Primary Source

2020-MOU-WVDP-DNC-RBC.pdf, p. 3

Rule Summary

The MOU placed a direct and non-negotiable responsibility on the state party and its organizers to 'fully implement' the creation of new diversity caucuses. A failure to form these caucuses constitutes a direct breach of this core mandate.

The Offenses (What Happened)

Prior to the AAC leadership installation, 75% of the DNC-mandated racial diversity caucuses (AAPI, Latino, Native American) had not been formed.

Evidence: selina-script.pdf, p. 2, 5 Official Record

During this same period, organizers successfully formed other non-racial diversity caucuses

Evidence: User provided fact Official Record

The Co-chair of the Black Caucus, Mary Claytor, stated that organizer Selina Vickers 'contacted every member of the Indigenous Caucus not named Sturm prior to their nomination meeting' and 'refused' a request to contact the Sturms.

Evidence: Not Named Sturm.pdf Official Record

The Indigenous Caucus was subsequently denied seats on the planning and bylaws subcommittees.

Evidence: Not Named Sturm.pdf Official Record

The Logical Reasoning

  1. The MOU required the formation of four specific racial diversity caucuses.
  2. Organizers failed to form three of these four caucuses before installing the committee's leadership.
  3. This failure cannot be attributed to a lack of time or ability, as they successfully formed other caucuses for their allies in the same timeframe.
  4. Evidence shows organizers also actively interfered in the formation of at least one of these caucuses (Indigenous) by selectively contacting members.
  5. The subsequent exclusion of that caucus from subcommittees reveals a pattern of disenfranchisement originating at the formation stage.
  6. The selective non-formation, combined with active interference, proves the disenfranchisement of three racial minority caucuses was a deliberate and strategic act.

Was this page helpful?

Your feedback helps us keep every proof and method page useful.