|
Jul 13, 2007 -- Legal Center Weekly Report: July 13, 2007 Campaign Legal Center Files Amicus Brief in Philadelphia Preemption Case
On Wednesday, July 11, 2007, the Campaign Legal Center filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in Nutter v. Dougherty to defend the legality of Philadelphia's newly-enacted ordinance limiting campaign contributions in City elections. The lawsuit, currently pending in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, challenges the City ordinance on grounds that the Pennsylvania state legislature has preempted the field of campaign finance regulation, proscribing any local efforts to legislate in this area.
The Legal Center's amicus brief supports the validity of the City ordinance, arguing that state courts across the country have recognized that the regulation of campaign finance is of central importance to local governments, and poses no threat or cost to the state or any neighboring localities. The brief also highlights that over 130 municipal and county governments nationwide have passed local campaign finance laws, and that such local initiatives provide models for broader governmental reform efforts and serve the general public interest.
Parties File Joint Motion in Christian Civic League of Maine v. FEC Case
On July 3, 2007, the three-judge court in Christian Civic League of Maine (CCLM ) v . FEC (D.D.C.) ordered the parties to file suggestions as to proceedings on remand in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc., (WRTL) v. FEC.
This lawsuit began in 2006, when CCLM sought to enjoin the "electioneering communication"' provisions of BCRA as they applied to a broadcast ad (the "Crossroads" ad) that CCLM wanted to pay for with its corporate funds. The ad referenced both sitting U.S. Senators from Maine, Olympia Snowe (R) and Susan Collins (R). Senator Snowe was a candidate on the June 2006 Republican primary ballot in Maine. The three-judge federal district court denied the injunction and later panel dismissed the lawsuit.
On July 13, 2007, all parties filed with the court a joint motion which asked the Court to: grant plaintiff's request for declaratory relief as to the 2006 "Crossroads" advertisement attached to plaintiff's complaint; deny plaintiff's requests for injunctive relief as to the "Crossroads" advertisement; and not alter its previous decision to deny plaintiff's requests for relief as to any other communications.
The Legal Center serves as co-counsel in the CCLM case to the defendant-interveners: Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Russell Feingold (D-WI), Representative Christopher Shays (R-CT) and former Representative Marty Meehan (D-MA), the principal sponsors of BCRA, and Representative Tom Allen (D-ME).
On July 13, 2007, both the Shays-Meehan plaintiffs and the FEC defendant filed Notices with Court. The Notices were filed after the district court ( Kollar-Kotelly , J.) issued an order on July 6, 2007, directing the parties to state whether the recent decision of the Supreme Court in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. (WRTL) was relevant to the issues before the court and whether additional briefing was necessary. Both the Notice filed by Shays-Meehan and the Notice filed by the FEC advised the court that the WRTL decision was not relevant to issues before the court and did not require further briefing.
Shays III is a challenge to FEC regulations pertaining to "coordinated communications," federal candidate and officeholder solicitation at state party fundraising events, and "federal election activity."
The Campaign Legal Center serves as counsel to Senators John McCain and Russell Feingold, who are participating in the case as amici curiae.
Legal Center Files as Amici in Supreme Court Case on Judicial Selection
Today, the Campaign Legal Center, with political scientists Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein and the Reform Institute, filed an amici brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in New York State Board of Elections v. Lopes Torres, No. 06-766. This case concerns a challenge under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to New York's statutorily-mandated system of nominating candidates for the elective office of trial court justice by party convention. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals found that this system violated the constitutional rights of party members and judicial candidates because it was designed to ensure that political party leaders - not the voters - controlled the outcome of judicial nominations. In the words of the Second Circuit, " through a byzantine and onerous network of nominating phase regulations . . . New York has transformed a de jure election [of judges] into a de facto appointment."
The Legal Center's amici brief urges the Supreme Court to affirm the judgment of the Second Circuit. It first describes how New York's convention system undermines the twin aims of any legitimate judicial selection process: maintaining judicial accountability and independence. By allowing party leaders to effectively choose the party's candidate and often the winner of the subsequent general election, the New York system makes judges both unaccountable to voters and overly reliant on party bosses, the brief argues. The brief also refutes the claim that the Second Circuit decision, by protecting the associational and voting rights of party members, threatens the statutes of 34 states which provide for some variety of nominating convention, as well as the presidential nominating convention. As amici point out, the New York system is unique, and far more restrictive of party members' constitutional rights than either the convention systems of other states, or the current convention system used for presidential nominations.
On July 11, reform groups including the Campaign Legal Center, Common Cause, Democracy 21, the League of Women Voters, Public Citizen and U.S. PIRG condemned the action being taken by Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) to block the Senate from going to conference on lobbying and ethics reform legislation, which the Senate passed in January.
The groups stated, "Senator DeMint is irresponsibly holding the Senate and the nation hostage by blocking essential legislation to help address the worst corruption scandals in Congress in thirty years." The reform groups also strongly urge Senate Republican Leader McConnell to join with Senate Majority Leader Reid in offering and supporting the cloture motions needed to get the lobbying and ethics reform bill to conference.
Legal Center and Democracy 21 File Comments on NPRM 2007-14
This week the Campaign Legal Center and Democracy 21 submitted comments to the Federal Election Commission in response to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on "Federal Election Activity and Non-Federal Elections." The rule proposed in NPRM 2007-14 would make permanent, with several revisions, an interim final rule that excluded from the definition of "Federal election activity" (FEA) certain activities the Commission deemed to impact only non-Federal elections.
The organizations urged the Commission to allow the interim final rule to expire and not adopt the proposed rule, permanently amending the definition of the phrase "in connection with an election in which a candidate for federal office appears on the ballot" at 11 C.F.R. § 100.24(a).
Legal Center Blog Highlights
Each week, the Campaign Legal Center staff posts blog entries on its site, www.clcblog.org. Click to read this week's entries: "'Clearly something has gone awry here.'," and "Suppressing Political Speech?," or to sign up for the blog, click here.
To read a variety of this week's editorials and articles on a variety of Campaign Legal Center issues, please click here. |
