2.7 Campaign Finance II- Supreme Court Decisions
SUPREME COURT CAMPAIGN FINANCE DECISIONS TIMELINE
SuperPac Mania
http://www.law.columbia.edu/magazine/621141 Links to an external site.
The Supreme Court and Campaign Finance.
Federal Elections Campaign Act (FECA)(1971)-
(1) Disclosure requirements
(2) Public funding of presidential elections
(3) Federal Election Commission (FEC) (created in 1974 in response to Watergate)
(a) Independent federal agency that enforces campaign laws
Buckley v. Valeo (1976) –SOFT MONEY
(1) Case upheld a federal law which set limits on campaign contributions, but ruled that spending money to influence elections is a form of constitutionally protected free speech, and struck down portions of the law. The court also stated candidates can give unlimited amounts of money to their own campaigns.
(2) only speech that expressly advocated the election or defeat of a candidate could be regulated. Thus organizations could spend unregulated "soft money" for a variety of activities, including "issue advertising Links to an external site.," a broad term that included any advertising that stopped short of expressly advocating the election or defeat of a candidate through words and phrases such as "vote for," "vote against," "support," "defeat," or "elect".
(3) Parties lobbied FEC to expand use of Soft Money to Include
(a) non-federal party building and administrative costs.
(b) voter registration Links to an external site., get out the vote Links to an external site.,
(c) issue advertising
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) 2000- Bans Soft Money
(1) McCain-Fiengold Bill
(2) The BCRA would ban national party committees from the acceptance or use of Soft Money
(3) Objectives of the Act:
(a) The increased role of soft money Links to an external site. in campaign financing, by prohibiting national political party committees from raising or spending any funds not subject to federal limits, even for state and local races or issue discussion;
(b) The proliferation of issue advocacy ads Links to an external site., by defining as "electioneering communications" broadcast ads that name a federal candidate within 30 days of a primary or caucus or 60 days of a general election, and prohibiting any such ad paid for by a corporation (including non-profit issue organizations such as Right to Life or the Environmental Defense Fund) or paid for by an unincorporated entity using any corporate or union general treasury funds.
(i) Stand By your Ad provision- “I endorse this ad”
McConnell v. Federal Election Commission (2003)
(1) Supreme Court upholds BCRA against claims that it violates free speech as set out in Buckley v. Valeo (1976)
Citizens United v Federal Election Commission (2010)
(1) Strikes down issue advocacy clause of BCRA
(2) Justice Kennedy in the majority; prohibition of all independent expenditures by corporations and unions was invalid and could not be applied to spending: "If the First Amendment has any force, it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in political speech." He also noted that since there was no way to distinguish between media and other corporations, these restrictions would allow Congress to suppress political speech in newspapers, books, television and blogs.
Links to an external site.
McCutcheon v. FEC (2014)
(1) Supreme Court struck down the aggregate limits on the amount an individual may contribute during a two-year period to all federal candidates, parties and political action committees combined. By a vote of 5-4, the Court ruled that the biennial aggregate limits are unconstitutional under the First Amendment
Everything you need to know about McCutcheon v. FEC
Before and After McCutcheon