Source: http://inpolicy.org/2015/07/horning-lawsuit-draft/
Timestamp: 2018-09-23 06:34:53
Document Index: 666050267

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1983', '§ 1', '§ 1331', '§ 4', '§ 3', '§ 6', '§ 6', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 1988']

Draft Copy: Horning Pro Se Complaint
___________________ DIVISION)
Andrew M. Horning [Pro Se] ) Plaintiff, )) Case No.
THE STATE OF INDIANA; )
THE INDIANA DEMOCRATIC PARTY; )
THE INDIANA REPUBLICAN PARTY ) Defendants. ))
1. This is a claim for violation of plaintiff’s civil and competitive endeavor rights as protected by the Indiana Constitution’s Article 1 Sections 23 and 25, and the Constitution and laws of the United States under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985, as well as 15 U.S.C. § 1 and 2.
2. The court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343; and 15 U.S.C. § 4 and 9
1. Plaintiff Andrew Michael Horning resides at 7851 Pleasant Hill Road, Freedom, Indiana 47431. Home phone is (812) 859 4063.
2. Defendant, The State of Indiana, including members of the General Assembly, the Governor and the Secretary of State, all of whom are associated with the private organizations known as the Indiana Democratic Party and the Indiana Republican Party. The State of Indiana holds offices at 200 W Washington St, Indianapolis, IN 46204. The chief officer of Indiana is the Governor, whose office phone is (317) 232-4567.
3. Defendant, The Indiana Democratic Party, headquartered at PNC Center, 115 W Washington St # 1165, Indianapolis, IN 46204. Phone: (317) 231-7100.
4. Defendant, The Indiana Republican Party, headquartered at 101 W. Ohio St., Suite 2200, Indianapolis, IN 46204. Phone: (317) 635-7561.
C. STATEMENT OF CLAIM
1. The government of the State of Indiana, comprised of elected officials and other officers associated with the two private organizations known as The Indiana Republican Party, and The Indiana Democratic Party (hereafter called the DP and RP), have conspired for many years to gain for themselves special rights, powers, money, employment and privileges, and to deny any others the same.
2. Plaintiff, as a candidate for local, state and federal office, has been and is currently, by the aforementioned cartel, denied equal access to material resources, time, venues, media, employment, ballots, privileges and powers, and has been categorized as a lesser-class citizen in violation of the Indiana Constitution’s Article I, Section 23: “The General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens;” and equal protections clause of the USA Constitution’s 14th amendment, “No State shall . . . deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
3. Plaintiff has been forced to support Primary Elections which directly harm the plaintiff both materially and politically. By creating arbitrary thresholds (Ind. Code § 3-10-1-2) that bar all other candidates and political organizations, the DP and RP have granted only themselves taxpayer-funded primary elections, which implicitly provide more money, public attention, free advertising and media promotion, as well as an imprimatur of greater legitimacy, to only Democrats and Republicans at the actual expense of all alternatives.
4. The Primary Elections, even in races uncontested within the DP and RP, provide several months of lead time and public attention, which equals money and power in politics. Plaintiff has been denied any benefits of participating in Primary Elections while associated with the private organization called the Indiana Libertarian Party, and would be denied such benefits as an independent candidate as well. I have therefore been deprived of time, public exposure and money; the most important elements of political endeavors.
5. Plaintiff has been denied the special organizational and political powers granted to only the DP and RP. For example, Ind. Code § 6-4.1-4 specifies that members of the Indiana Election Commission “must be a member of a major political party.” And Ind. Code § 6-4.1-4 grants that only “the state chairman of the major political party” has powers of nomination and appointments for succeeding terms. Only designees “of the state chairman of each of the major political parties” shall “serve as members of the state recount commission.” (Ind. Code § 3-12-10-2.1) Ind. Code § 3-10-1-4 grants only major political parties privileges of organization and process for nomination to public office and filling vacancies (e.g., Ind. Code § 3-13-5, 6). Precinct Committeeman are a special class of citizen who have special powers (example, Ind. Code § 3-13-1-4, 5, 6), yet aren’t subject to the limitations placed on other political officeholders (Ind. Code § 3-6-1-15).
6. Plaintiff has been denied equal status as a candidate on the ballot itself. Ind. Code § 3-10-1-15 set apart a separate ticket for “each political party holding a primary election” making all alternative candidates not just inconspicuous to voters, but also of a lesser implied value.
7. Plaintiff has been unable to run for office independent of a private organization, as Indiana’s petition signature requirements are so difficult as to be impossible for a person of modest means. Even the DP and RP, with their special powers and privileges, and even with well-funded candidates, have enough difficulty with the petition signature requirements that DP organization members forged signatures for both Hillary Clinton’s and Barack Obama’s primary election ballot access in 2008.
8. Plaintiff’s 2004 association with the Republican Party demonstrates the tremendous advantage gained by the DP and RP. The plaintiff won ten times as many votes with less personal expense than in his previous or subsequent Libertarian Party campaigns.
9. Plaintiff further alleges that the Indiana Constitution’s Article I, Section 25 forbids the aforementioned legislation by invoking authority never granted, and by transgressing constitutional limitations such as the previously mentioned equal protection rights: “No law shall be passed, the taking effect of which shall be made to depend upon any authority, except as provided in this Constitution.”
10. As a result of defendant’s conduct, plaintiff was injured as follows:
11. Markedly reduced political success. Odds of electoral success are demonstrably more dependent upon organization membership than to personal merit or effort.
12. Greatly increased effort and personal cost. The DP and RP cartel has made investing in their campaigns more attractive and lucrative to lobbyists and those wishing to purchase political influence and advantage.
13. Public derision and disrespect. Independents and so-called “third party” candidates are routinely, and even by policy in the media, demeaned as, “spoilers,” “wasted vote,” “losers” and “not-viable.”
14. Corrupt, costly, destructive government as the inevitable consequence of their cartel. This has been affirmed by USA Presidents as disparate as Wilson and Eisenhower, and with warnings since Washington. The plaintiff argues that the State of Indiana, and the DP and RP, use unconstitutional special powers to both consolidate their benefits under such corruption, and to thwart any alternatives; one alternative being the plaintiff himself.
1. Equal access and rights to political ballots, privileges and powers, regardless of organization or partisan associations, and without special class, for the plaintiff, and all Indiana citizens.
2. Equal access to voters; meaning same elections, same times, no exceptions, delays or special elections, for the plaintiff, and all Indiana citizens.
3. Damages to compensate for all pain and suffering, loss of income, loss of enjoyment of life, and any other injuries inflicted by defendants, and,
4. Such injunctive, declaratory, or other relief as may be appropriate, including attorney’s fees and reasonable expenses as authorized by 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
1. Plaintiff asks that the case be tried by a jury.
Signature _________________________________ Date: _______________ Page 3 of ____
(Signature and Certificate of Service must be on last page of document)
Docket No. _____________________________________________
Date: _________________________ Signature: ________________________________________
I certify that a copy of this _____________________________________________________________
has been mailed, postage prepaid, upon (insert address in space provided):
Date: _________________________________ Signed: _________________________________
NOTE: You must complete this section, as well as mail copies of this document to each party.