Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> The Volokh Conspiracy
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Legal Commentary
: The Volokh ConspiracyD.C. Circuit Strikes Down Caps on Contributions to Independent Expenditure Committees
By Eugene Volokh
The case is SpeechNow.org v. FEC (en banc) (unanimous):
The contribution limits of 2 U.S.C. § 441a(a)(1)(C) and 441a(a)(3) violate the First Amendment by preventing plaintiffs from donating to SpeechNow in excess of the limits and by prohibiting SpeechNow from accepting donations in excess of the limits. We should be clear, however, that we only decide these questions as applied to contributions to SpeechNow, an independent expenditure-only group. Our holding does not affect, for example, § 441a(a)(3)?s limits on direct contributions to candidates.
Sounds quite right to me, and entirely consistent with the Court?s past jurisprudence on the right to expressive association, which goes back 50 years to the NAACP cases. The right to speak, about candidates, ballot measures, and other matters, must include the right of people to pool their resources in order to speak effectively ? not just the right to speak by oneself, or using just one?s own resources. But contributions to candidates are a different matter, for reasons I discuss in Part III of this article.
The court also upheld various organizational, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements: ?SpeechNow, as we have said, intends to comply with the disclosure requirements applicable to those who make independent expenditures but are not organized as political committees.... Because SpeechNow intends only to make independent expenditures, the additional reporting requirements that the FEC would impose on SpeechNow if it were a political committee are minimal.... Nor do the organizational requirements that SpeechNow protests, such as designating a treasurer and retaining records, impose much of an additional burden upon SpeechNow, especially given the relative simplicity with which SpeechNow intends to operate.?
Thanks to Josh Blackman?s blog for the pointer.
Copyright © 2010
This feed is for personal, non-commercial use only.
The use of this feed on other websites breaches copyright. If this content is not in your news reader, it makes the page you are viewing an infringement of the copyright. (Digital Fingerprint:
)
Full post as published by The Volokh Conspiracy on March 26, 2010 (boomark / email).
Specialty Lamp International
Recalls Counterfeit Circuit Breakers
HIV Funds
Dallas Independent School District pays $336,000 settlement for misappropriated program funds.

Widening impact of Citizens United: En Banc D.C. Circuit nullifies donor limit
Abstention in Important Ninth Circuit Campaign Finance Case
Federal court extends Citizens United; Enjoins San Diego law restricting corporate contributions







