Litigation

Court Lets Party Spending Limits Stand

By Peter Hardin

The Supreme Court let stand Monday a lower court decision affirming the constitutionality of limits on the sums political parties can spend in coordination with their candidates.

The high court declined to hear an appeal in a lawsuit by former Rep. Joseph Cao, R-La., and the Republican National Committee, according to a Politico article.

The litigation was part of a widespread campaign by conservatives against campaign finance restrictions.

?Plaintiffs? challenge would have blown huge loopholes in the federal campaign finance laws and enabled large-scale circumvention of the individual contribution limits,? said Tara Malloy of the Campaign Legal Center about the case in which the Supreme Court acted Monday.

“[T]here remains a lengthy list of [campaign finance] challenges making their way through the courts hoping for a sympathetic audience from the Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts,?  Malloy warned in a press release.

At his Election Law blog, scholar Rick Hasen said he thought the court would likely have voted to review the appeal.

He wrote, “Does this mean that Justice [Samuel] Alito and the Chief Justice are a bit gun-shy about wading back into the McCain-Feingold waters, or is something else at work?”

Next week, the high court will hear a challenge to Arizona’s public financing law, in McComish v. Bennett. You can learn more about that case from Gavel Grab and from a JAS resources page about the case.

The challenge to limits on political party spending was being handled by Indiana-based attorney Jim Bopp, a leading opponent of campaign restrictions, according to a separate Politico article that explored at length the recent legal challenges brought by foes of such regulation.

Full post as published by The Gavel on March 21, 2011 (boomark / email).