|
Supreme Court to Revisit Campaign Finance
Law and Restrictions on Independent Expenditures
Full text of district court decision in Wisconsin Right to Life v.
F.E.C.
On January 19, 2007, the United States Supreme Court
agreed to hear a landmark
case involving the intersection between First Amendment
rights and campaign
finance restrictions. Oral argument was held April 25, 2007.
The case arises from a December 21, 2006 decision
by a federal court in Washington, D.C. finding that certain provisions of the
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (“BCRA”) were unconstitutional.
The campaign restrictions, which were challenged in Wisconsin Right to Life v.
Federal Election Commission, prohibited certain “independent
expenditure” advertisements from being aired during the 30-days prior to a
federal primary election and 60-days prior to a federal general election.
BCRA provisions permitted the airing of non-coordinated “independent
expenditures” so long as strict requirements were followed regarding the
disclosure of donors, caps on the amount of dollars used, and when such ads
could run. The BCRA regulations sought to prevent groups from secretly
supporting or opposing specific candidates by conducting “independent
expenditures” or “issue ads” paid for with otherwise prohibited corporate
political contributions.
The advertisements, as argued by the Wisconsin Right to Life, were not express
advocacy supporting or opposing a specific candidate, but were “issue ads” that
urged Wisconsin voters to “contact their U.S. Senators to ask them to vote
against filibusters of federal judicial nominees.” The Federal Election
Commission argued that such ads were “sham issue ads” prohibited under BCRA by
taking place within the 60-days before an election and paid for by secretive,
non-disclosed corporate dollars. The federal court disagreed with the F.E.C.
and found the ads to be “general issue ads,” which are permissible under the
Supreme Court’s ruling in McConnell v. F.E.C. and cannot be regulated by the
unconstitutional provisions of BCRA.
For more information on this ruling or other campaign finance questions, please
contact the Bricker &
Eckler Government Relations Group.
|
