http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/specialguests/2008/jan/16/let_the_people_voteThere is a DU post here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4083691The below I wrote for the JK group, I'm guessing it's not needed here but I'll leave it in just in case. :)
For those who haven't been following this, the gist is that way back some time ago (last May I think), the Nevada Dem party agreed to new caucus rules that created "at-large" caucus locations for some classes of workers, mainly casino and other workers in those areas, who otherwise wouldn't have been able to attend their caucus because of the timing.
Everyone agreed to the new rules at the time. However, shortly after the culinary workers union (CWU) endorsed Obama, the teachers union joined with people allegedly supporting Clinton, to bring a lawsuit that would block the at-large caucuses.
The bottom line, as I understand it, is if the plaintiffs (teachers union) get their way, the casino workers will not be able to participate in the caucus.
The rationale by the teachers union that this disenfranchisement is legitimate, is that some of their members are disenfranchised by the "new" rules.
However remember that the rules are not all that new; presumably there was an opportunity to raise the issue affecting teachers union members at the time the rules were being revised; and even if all is innocent and IF the suit has merit, the timing makes Clinton* look really, really, really bad.
* Clinton because it appears that the leaders of the teachers union are supporting her, even though the union itself didn't officially endorse.