LULAC - TRO Against LULAC, Margaret Moran and Manuel Escobar

The Editor: This is the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) that was issued by the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Bronx.  The TRO was issued ex-parte, meaning that it was sought without the presence of the defending party.  Ex-parte orders are common when a plaintiff party is trying to protect an interest that is beyond its control.  It is common in espousal abuse cases, where an abused wife obtains an ex-parte order from the court to keep the husband from causing harm to her or the children of the family.  In divorce proceeding, it is referred to as a protected order.

 

The LULAC attorneys understand very clearly what ex-parte TRO's mean.  The object of a TRO is to keep a party committing the wrongful act complained from being committed.

 

This TRO is straight forward.  It not confusing.

 

The order restrains, prohibits, Margaret Moran and Manuel Escobar from using the Legal Advisor in the proceedings of the National Assembly.

 

The order did not prohibit the National Assembly from continuing the convention of the National Assembly of LULAC.

 

The powers that be in LULAC planned to win the election of their slate of delegates by using the Legal Advisor to bar a counting of the votes of the delegates, that is, a head by head count of the delegates, a procedure that is allowed under Robert's Rules of Order and a procedure that has been a part of LULAC conventions since 1929.  The use of the Legal Advisor is a make up rule of the Rules Committee of National LULAC.

 

The Rule 12 that the court order is addressing is:

 

12.       Challenges to any election must be issued to the National Legal Advisor immediately after the outcome is announced and before another election has begun. It shall take a two-thirds vote to overturn any ruling made by the National Legal Advisor.

The role of the legal advisor is strictly defined in the LULAC Constitution.  Their is no role for the Legal Advisor as it pertains to the meeting of the National Assembly.  Rule 12 is a creating of the Rules Committee.  It would take a 2/3's vote to over-ride illegal Rule 12.  Rule 12 has the effect of usurping power from the National Assembly.  The Rules Committee cannot create rules for a convention of the National Assembly that are beyond the wording of the LULAC Constitution.  The LULAC Constitution governs the conventions of the LULAC assemblies, the district, the state and the national assemblies.  For conventions, what is not in the LULAC Constitution goes to Robert's Rules of Order.  Getting a division of the house, a counting of the votes, under Robert's Rules requires a simple motion, not debatable, with the requirement of the number of votes for a count being written in the Constitution or the Bylaws, and if not found their, a simple majority vote to determine whether a count of the votes shall be taken.  In creating Rule 12, the Rules Committee usurped the power and authority of the National Assembly, the supreme authority of LULAC.

 

There was also a restraint to the use of or reliance on Rule 21, the rule stated here:

21.       Any individual that uses profanity, verbally threatens or attacks another member on or near the voting floor will be removed from the voting floor and charges to expel the member for “actions contrary to the principles of LULAC” will be brought against the member by the presiding officer at the next Executive Committee or National Board meeting.

The restraint regarding Rule 21 concerns unhappy LULAC'ers with the actions of the powers that be in LULAC were threatened with expulsion for "overly" protesting actions of the powers that be in the convention of the National Assembly.  This rule is another make up rule of the Rules Committee and the powers that be in LULAC.  The rule effectively meant that if you were targeted by a presiding officer of the convention, a next step of expulsion would eventually take place and the LULAC'er would be expelled.  The Constitution specifies that expulsion is a matter for the National Board,. not the Executive Committee.  Challenging a ruling of the presiding officer or an Election Judge are not grounds for expulsion from LULAC.  Blowing a horn or beating drums at a convention of delegates are not grounds for expulsion.  They might be grounds for being removed from the floor, but they are not sua sponte, automatic grounds, for expulsion.  This rule is a make up rule of the Rules Committee.  The rule, like rule number 5, is an illegal rule.

 

The court order did not tell Margaret Moran that the LULAC convention of the National Assembly could not proceed.  That wrong interpretation was the doing Margaret Moran, Luis Vera, Manuel Escobar and Miguel Ortiz.  The objective of the Machine, the powers that be in LULAC, was to do what they did in San Antonio in 2013, when another mal-doer, Roger Rocha, who the Election Judge in the Texas LLAC Convention, order the Texas LULAC Convention of the Texas Assembly be terminated on the grounds that a riot was about to take place.  A cancelled election leaves the officers in place who are not termed out to continue to run LULAC as the Executive Committee and as members of the LULAC National Board.  The bad leaders that LULAC has had would have continued in power until the next national convention in 2015.

The court order imposed a fine of $4,500,000.00 for any breach of the TRO, that in, for doing what the court was prohibiting from being done.

You can read the order below and reach your own conclusion.

The parties will be before the New York state court on July 21, 2014.
 

 Court Order