|
Dec 21, 2007 -- Legal Center Weekly Report: December 21, 2007
Legal Center Executive Director J. Gerald Hebert issued a statement yesterday regarding the possible shutdown of the Federal Election Commission.
The Senate wrapped up this year's session without voting on the nomination of Hans von Spakovsky to a six-year term on the Federal Election Commission. Reform groups like the Campaign Legal Center, along with many key members of the Senate, helped to draw attention to von Spakovsky's disgraceful record at the Justice Department over the past year.
The controversial von Spakovsky nomination ended up blocking the Senate confirmation of several other FEC nominees when Senator Mitch McConnell refused to allow the Senate a straight up or down vote on the von Spakovsky nomination, and insisted on a supermajority vote for all other FEC nominees. With von Spakovsky's recess appointment about to expire, Senator McConnell's actions may have the effect of leaving the FEC with only two FEC commissioners in place as 2008 begins.
Hebert also urged yesterday that the President withdraw von Spakovsky's nomination so that the agency charged with enforcing our nation's election laws can get about the business of doing so.
This lawsuit was filed in 2006 and challenges several provisions of Texas election law that impose burdens on the constitutional and federal statutory rights of voters and political parties. The suit also alleges racially selective law enforcement of Texas election laws by the Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott. The district court granted a limited preliminary injunction which enjoined the State from prosecuting a narrow class of persons who merely possess, consensually, the ballot of another voter. That injunction was stayed by the Fifth Circuit just before the November 2006 general election. This appeal by the State of Texas followed.
Oral argument was held before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals on December 4, 2007, in Willie Ray v. State of Texas. At oral argument, the State offered to revise its mail-in ballot envelopes which the State claimed would resolve the issues that were the subject of the district court's injunction. The court of appeals granted the state leave to submit a letter brief within ten days of the oral argument setting forth its revised ballot envelopes and instructions. The State submitted its letter brief on December 14. On December 20, 2007, counsel for Willie Ray, et al., filed a reply to the state's letter brief. In the reply, we disagreed with the state that the new envelope cured the problem that had been remedied by the limited district court injunction.
The Ray plaintiffs-appellees are represented by Bruce Spiva and Kathleen Hartnett of the Washington, DC law firm, Spiva & Hartnett LLP. Campaign Legal Center Executive Director Gerald Hebert serves as co-counsel to the plaintiffs-appellees in the case.
The Campaign Legal Center, together with other reform groups, sent a letter to the House Ethics Committee in opposition to their recent flawed interpretation of new House rules intended to put an end to the lavish convention parties paid for by lobbyists to "honor" Members of Congress.
The Committee's guidance interprets the rule on parties that honor Members at nominating conventions to apply only where a party is held to honor a specific Member, but not to honor a state delegation, a caucus or a congressional committee.
Campaign Legal Center Policy Director Meredith McGehee, issued a statement criticizing the guidance, calling it a step in the wrong direction. She pointed out that this latest self-serving decision by the Ethics Committee is another indication of why reform groups are pushing for a more independent, outside voice in the ethics process. Such a failure to properly interpret and enforce rules raises concerns about what kind of additional damage the Ethics Committee could do to the landmark reforms enacted this year.
CLC Files Motion to Participate as Amicus and Reply Unity08 v. FEC
After having discovered this week that an amici motion and brief filed by the Legal Center, together with Democracy 21, in April 2007 had been lost in the court's files due to clerical error, the two organizations re-filed the amici motion and brief this week in Unity08 v. FEC—a case challenging the FEC's determination that the 527 organization Unity08 is a "political committee" under federal law. Unity08 immediately filed a memo with the court opposing our amici participation, to which we responded today by filing a reply to Unity08's opposition memo.
The Legal Center's reply makes clear that, contrary to Unity08's claim, the Legal Center's interest in the litigation is not adequately represented by the FEC. Although the Legal Center shares the FEC's conclusion that Unity08 is a "political committee" under federal law, the Legal Center has long advocated a different legal-analytical road to reach that conclusion. The Legal Center's presentation of a legal argument not included in the FEC's briefs, we believe, will assist the court in deciding the Unity08 case. Further, earlier this year the district court in Shays v. FEC, 511 F. Supp. 2d 19, 27 (D.D.C. Aug. 30, 2007), concluded that the FEC has "misinterpreted" the law regarding "political committee" status and embraced the analysis offered by Legal Center and Democracy 21 attorneys on behalf of plaintiffs and amici in the Shays case.
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: "FEC Impasse Continues," "Von Spakovsky Should Not Be Confirmed," 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. |
