Legal

Supreme Court Upholds Campaign Finance Disclosure Law

Alexandria, VA – The Supreme Court today affirmed without comment a ruling in the case Independence Institute v. Federal Election Commission, upholding the constitutionality of a campaign finance disclosure law. The Court’s order reflects agreement with the lower court’s result, but not necessarily its reasoning. Under the law challenged in the case, government reporting obligations are […]

Filed Under: Blog, Independence Institute v. FEC, Legal, Press Releases, U.S. Supreme Court, Independence Institute v. FEC, Completed Cases (Litigation)

Ten Amicus Briefs Urge Supreme Court to Hear Full Arguments in Free Speech and Donor Privacy Case

Alexandria, VA – Ten amicus briefs, including briefs from U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and multiple well-known national groups, urge the U.S. Supreme Court to hear full arguments in a free speech case implicating important issues of donor privacy, Independence Institute v. FEC. Under federal campaign finance laws, the Supreme Court must rule on […]

Filed Under: Blog, Independence Institute v. FEC, Legal, Press Releases, Cato Institute, institute for justice, Michael W. McConnell, Mitch McConnell, Nadine Strossen, Philanthropy Roundtable, State Policy Network, U.S. Chamber of Commerce

Bloomberg BNA: FEC Disclosure Rules for Ads Referring to Candidates Upheld (In the News)

By Kenneth P. Doyle
Federal Election Commission disclosure requirements applied to political ads known as “electioneering communications” have been upheld by a three-judge federal court panel (Independence Institute v. FEC, D.D.C., No. 14-cv-1500, 11/3/16).
The special panel of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia rejected a constitutional challenge to FEC disclosure requirements, which was brought by a Colorado-based nonprofit group called the Independence Institute…
The Independence Institute was represented in the case by attorney Allen Dickerson of the Center for Competitive Politics, a nonprofit that is critical of campaign finance regulations.
When asked during a court hearing in October about the type of ads the institute believed should be protected from disclosure requirements, Dickerson pointed only to the ad the group said it wanted to sponsor in Colorado in 2014. The ad referred to the position of Udall and Sen. Michael Bennet, both Colorado Democrats, on a federal sentencing bill. The ad was never aired.

Filed Under: In the News, In the News Our Cases, Independence Institute v. FEC

Citizen Sues Missouri Ethics Commission for First Amendment Violations

Alexandria, VA – The Center for Competitive Politics (CCP) today announced a federal lawsuit and motion for a temporary restraining order has been filed on behalf of Ron Calzone against the Missouri Ethics Commission (MEC). Calzone has been targeted by Missouri State Capitol insiders and the MEC for his volunteer advocacy for individual liberty, free […]

Filed Under: Blog, Calzone v MEC, Legal, Press Releases, Missouri Ethics Commission, Ron Calzone, Zac Morgan, Current Cases (Litigation), Missouri

Supreme Court Rejects Colorado Appeal In Coalition For Secular Government Case

Alexandria, VA – The Center for Competitive Politics released the following statement after the United States Supreme Court denied an appeal by the state of Colorado to hear Coalition for Secular Government (CSG) v. Williams. In the case, an appeals court ruled that Colorado’s ballot issue disclosure law violates the First Amendment for groups raising […]

Filed Under: Blog, CSG v. Gessler, In the News, In the News Our Cases, Press Releases, CSG v. Williams, U.S. Supreme Court, Current Cases (Litigation), Colorado

Amicus Brief: Coloradans for a Better Future v. Campaign Integrity Watchdog, LLC (Colorado Supreme Court)

Download Amicus Brief

Filed Under: All Amicus Briefs, Blog, Current Amicus Briefs

Salt Lake Tribune: State agrees to pay legal fees over unconstitutional campaign law (In the News)

Robert Gehrke
The plaintiffs argued that the law was overly broad and, if the law stood, they would be prohibited from weighing in on ballot questions or possible initiatives unless they disclosed all their donors.
The state ultimately capitulated, entering into an agreement last month that the disclosure requirements were unconstitutional unless related to political entities whose “major purpose” is political advocacy.
The state agreed not to prosecute groups for violating the law and to pay the legal fees for the lawyers with the Alexandria, Va.-based Center for Competitive Politics who represented the plaintiffs.

Filed Under: In the News, In the News Our Cases, Utah Taxpayers Association v. Cox

Utah Agrees to Pay $125,000 in Free Speech Lawsuit

State of Utah previously conceded First Amendment violation Alexandria, VA – The state of Utah today told a federal court it would pay $125,000 in attorney’s fees in a constitutional challenge to its campaign finance laws. If the court approves the fees, as expected, it would mark the final step in a lawsuit filed on […]

Filed Under: Blog, Press Releases, Utah Taxpayers Association v. Cox, Utah Taxpayers Association v. Cox, Utah

Amicus Brief: Wolfson v. Concannon in Support of Petitioner

Download Amicus Brief

Filed Under: All Amicus Briefs, Blog, Current Amicus Briefs

Utah settles lawsuit, concedes First Amendment violation

Alexandria, VA – In an agreement approved by a federal judge this afternoon, Utah agreed not to enforce a state campaign finance law that violated the First Amendment. The complex law required nonprofit advocacy groups to register with the state and publicly report their supporters’ private information, threatening donations to those organizations. The agreement, known […]

Filed Under: Blog, Press Releases, Utah Taxpayers Association v. Cox, uta v. cox, Utah