|
Apr 27, 2007 -- Legal Center Weekly Report: April 27, 2007 Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in WRTL v. FEC
On April 25, 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments ( transcript ) in McCain et al. & FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. ("WRTL"). The Campaign Legal Center serves as co-counsel to appellants U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ), and Reps. Chris Shays (R-CT), Marty Meehan (D-MA) and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI).
At issue in the case is the question of whether BCRA's prohibition on the use of corporate treasury funds to pay for "electioneering communications"—upheld as constitutional by the Supreme Court in its 2003 McConnell decision—is constitutional as applied to three advertisements that Wisconsin Right to Life sought to pay for with corporate treasury funds prior to the 2004 federal election. Appellants argued that WRTL's ads were precisely the type of sham issue ads that Congress sought to regulate when it enacted BCRA in 2002, and that the Supreme Court held could constitutionally be regulated in its McConnell decision.
House Freshman Call for Tougher Ethics, Statement by CLC Policy Director
"Recognizing the key role that congressional corruption played in the historic Democratic takeover in the November elections, 27 House freshmen wrote today to Chairman Michael Capuano (D-MA) and the Special Task Force on Ethics urging them to recommend changes that will build increased independence and professionalism into the ethics enforcement process." Meredith McGehee, Campaign Legal Center Policy Director, stated this week following the freshman's letter to the Task Force Chairman.
The letter continues, "Voters have lost faith in the congressional ethics process to the point where being cleared by the Ethics Committee no longer holds any water with the public." McGehee also praises the efforts of Representatives Zack Space (D-OH) and Baron Hill (D-IN) for their efforts to induce leadership to pass effective ethics reform, despite the "serious reluctance on the part of the old bulls."
This week, the Campaign Legal Center joined Common Cause in sending a letter to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) urging Commissioners to vote against expanded must-carry rules until the FCC has finalized public interest obligations for digital broadcasters. The Commission is weighing whether to mandate dual carriage of both analog and digital signals.
According to the letter, "The FCC's inaction on public interest obligations remains a gaping hole in the fabric of our nation's telecommunications policy. With the 2009, analog-to-digital transition deadline looming, the Commission has the responsibility to set bright-line guides for broadcasters and the public to ensure the interests of the American people are represented in the digital transition."
This week, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia scheduled a hearing for July 31, 2007 in Shays & Meehan v. FEC (Shays II)—a lawsuit challenging the FEC's failure to promulgate a regulation making clear when 527 groups must register as federal "political committees."
Last year, the district court found the FEC had failed to adequately explain and justify its decision not to adopt a 527 regulation but, instead, to regulate 527 groups on a case-by-case basis. In response to that order, the FEC again refused to issue a regulation and simply revised its explanation and justification ("E&J") of its case-by-case approach.
Earlier this year, plaintiffs Shays and Meehan filed a motion and memorandum for further relief on the grounds that the FEC's revised E&J is inadequate and that the agency's continuing failure to regulate 527 groups violates the Administrative Procedures Act. Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Russ Feingold (D-WI), represented by the Campaign Legal Center, filed an amici curiae brief in the case supporting the plaintiffs' motion for further relief.
The Legal Center's Associate Legal Counsel, Paul S. Ryan, testified telephonically on Apr. 18 before the Vermont House Committee on Government Operations, regarding campaign finance reform options following the Supreme Court's 2006 decision in Randall v. Sorrell, where the Court struck down Vermont's contribution limits as unconstitutionally low. Ryan also submitted written testimony to the Committee this week, advising the Committee that the contribution limits contained in a bill recently passed by the state senate (S.164) address the concerns articulated by the Supreme Court in Randall and, consequently, that the limits in the senate bill would likely survive legal challenge.
Legal Center Blog Highlights
Each week, the Campaign Legal Center staff posts blog entries on its site, www.clcblog.org . This week's entries include Click to read this week's entry: "Knocking Down the Myths About BCRA," or to sign up for blog updates, click here .
To read a variety of this week's editorials and articles on a variety of Campaign Legal Center issues, please click here . |
