The Wyoming Supreme Court has ruled that the Uinta County Republican Party must follow state rules regarding its internal elections. This sets a precedent for all political parties at the county level despite their status as private organizations.
County-level political parties such as the Uinta County Republicans are run by a precinct committee. This committee is elected by party members during the primary election, when registered Republicans or Democrats vote on who will represent their district at local party meetings.
The district committee then votes for its own internal leaders, and according to a recent sentence of the Supreme Court of the State — Only the elected members of the district commission can participate in this vote.
“The statute clearly designated a specific group of people who could vote: the central county committee. This committee is made up of people from the district committee elected in the previous year’s primaries,” the ruling states. “By specifying the central county committee as who will ‘elect’ its officers, the legislature chose to restrict the eligible voters in that election.”
The question came to the Wyoming Supreme Court because, in 2021, people who were not actively elected committee members in the Uinta County GOP participated in voting for their internal leaders.
Some of the duly elected precinct members challenged the election in a lawsuit, arguing that the vote took away the voice of the people who voted for them. But the Uinta County District Court ruled against them, issuing a ruling that said the local party could set its own rules for choosing its chairman and state delegates.
The duly elected members appealed the decision, and the Wyoming Supreme Court issued its own ruling last month. The state’s highest court sided with the elected members, setting a precedent in the state that only elected district committee members can vote in these elections.
In its ruling, the court acknowledged that it typically stays out of political party matters except where there is “clear and unequivocal” direction from the state legislature. He argued that this was just such a case. The court also stated that it has jurisdiction over this matter because, although political parties are private organizations, they participate in government processes, such as appointments to government vacancies.
The supreme court returned the case to the lower court “for further proceedings consistent with this decision.”
