Post Tagged with: "Campaign Finance"

• Deconstructing the Emergence and Effect of Super PACs

  By Alex Trepp, Consumers and Corporations, First Amendment, Issue Areas, Voting and Elections September 29, 2011 9:12 am no comments

  Stephen Colbert has increased the visibility of super PACs with Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow. And if Colbert’s goal is to initiate discussion about super PAC impact, he may satisfy his goals. But if Colbert wants to reform this new vehicle for political spending, the legal system is an unlikely [...]

   
• 

  In Their Own Words – Campaign Finance and Corruption

  First Amendment, Issue Areas, Voting and Elections August 11, 2011 12:30 pm no comments

  According to the Roberts Court, the only form of “corruption” that the Government has a legitimate interest in seeking to prevent through campaign finance regulation is quid pro quo corruption, i.e. the trading of cash for votes. By limiting the “corruption” interest in this way, the Roberts Court has thus been able to argue that any threat of undue influence can be satisfactorily addressed through caps on individual donations to candidates. As a result, the “corruption” interest appeared to have lost most, if not all, of its critical force after Citizens United.

   

• Wrapping Up Court's Campaign Finance Ruling

  By Alex Trepp, Courts, Issue Areas, Voting and Elections June 28, 2011 9:42 am 1 comment

  This morning the Supreme Court decided two campaign finance cases consolidated under Arizona Free Enterprise Club’s Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett. Writing for a narrow but familiar 5-4 majority—which included Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito—Chief Justice John Roberts overruled the Ninth Circuit and struck down Arizona’s Citizens Clean Elections Act.

   
• 

  [Breaking News] Today's SCOTUS Decisions on Free Speech

  Courts, First Amendment, Issue Areas June 27, 2011 11:32 am no comments

  The Supreme Court today struck down two state laws concerning free speech. In Arizona Free Enterprise Club PAC v. Bennett, Chief Justice Roberts, representing the usual 5-4 split, delivered an opinion striking down Arizona’s Clean Elections Act granting matching funds to publicly financed candidates triggered by spending by privately financed candidates and outside groups. In EMA v. Brown, Scalia delivers the opinion of a seven Justice majority striking down California’s ban on the sale of violent video games to children. More analysis to come.

   

• Legal Scholars Argue Supreme Court Should Limit Campaign Spending in Judicial Elections

  Courts, Issue Areas, Voting and Elections April 18, 2011 3:57 pm 1 comment

  Dean of the law school at the University of California, Irvine, Erwin Cherminsky, and associate professor of law at Hofstra, James J. Sample, published an Op Ed piece in the New York Times yesterday arguing that the Supreme Court should limit campaign contributions in judicial elections. Cherminsky and Sample assert [...]

   

• Campaign-Finance Challenges Before SCOTUS Once Again

  Courts, First Amendment, Issue Areas, Voting and Elections March 28, 2011 11:39 am no comments

  Today the Supreme Court hears the most recent campaign-finance challenge, the first since ruling in 2010′s Citizens United v. Federal Election Committee that unions and corporations are not limited in the amount they are permitted to spend in promoting candidates in political races. This time, the Court will hear arguments [...]