Filter by Type
Filter by Issue Area
Filter by Document Type
Filter by Case/Action Status
The state Republican parties of New York and Tennessee challenged an SEC rule barring investment firms from managing state assets for two years after a firm or its associates make more than de minimis contributions to officeholders or candidates who have or would have power to award investment...
Plaintiffs filed suit to challenge the constitutionality of Mississippi’s campaign finance disclosure requirements as they apply to small groups and individuals intending to support or oppose state constitutional ballot measures.
On September 2, 2014, the Independence Institute filed suit challenging the constitutionality of Colorado’s “electioneering communication” disclosure provisions, which require a group spending over $1,000 on television, radio or print ads that mention the name of a state candidate within 60 days of...
CLC attorneys represented LULAC and individual voters in Harris County Texas who filed suit challenging Harris County’s voter registration practices and procedures under several provisions of federal law. The case was eventually resolved by stipulation...
Willie Ray and several others brought suit (represented by CLC attorneys) challenging then-Attorney General Greg Abbott’s racially selective prosecutions of black and Latinos voters for alleged voter fraud...
This case challenged the constitutionality of an Indiana law that requires voters to present either a state or federal photo identification in order to vote...
In November 2008, the RNC brought a constitutional challenge to the “soft money” restrictions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) that bar the national parties from raising or spending soft money and prohibit state parties from using soft money for activities that affect federal elections...
In 2009, Vermont Right to Life Committee (VRLC) challenged Vermont’s campaign finance law's disclosure provisions and contribution limits as applied to VRLC's fund that allegedly makes only independent expenditures. The district court upheld the challenged disclosure provisions and contribution...
North Carolina NAACP v. McCrory challenged North Carolina HB 589, which eliminated same day registration, slashed the state’s early voting period by a full week, got rid of the pre-registration of 16- and 17-year olds, barred out-of-precinct provisional ballots from being counted, and instituted a...
The Republican National Committee and donor Shaun McCutcheon brought suit to challenge the $74,600 aggregate limit on contributions to non-candidate committees and the $48,600 aggregate limit on contributions to candidate committees in a two-year election cycle. On April 2, 2014, the Supreme Court...
In March 2010, plaintiffs filed suit to challenge Montana’s corporate expenditure restriction, M.C.A. § 13-35-227, claiming that the ban was unconstitutional under Citizens United v. FEC. On June 25, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari and summarily reversed the Montana Supreme Court’s...
In 2009, Plaintiffs filed suit to prevent Washington State from making petitions connected to a state ballot measure publicly available under the state Public Records Act. Plaintiffs argued that the state records law was facially unconstitutional in connection to ballot measure petitions, and the...
On January 10, 2007, Unity08, a self-described “nascent political party,” brought suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia challenging a FEC advisory opinion finding that it was a “political committee” under FECA even though it had not yet nominated its presidential and vice...
These consolidated cases, initiated in 2006, challenged the constitutionality of Connecticut’s campaign finance reform legislation, which included a public financing system and pay-to-play restrictions which prohibited contributions from lobbyists, state contractors, and members of their immediate...
The plaintiffs rely on the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Citizens United v. FEC to challenge Minnesota’s restriction on corporate contributions to state candidates and political parties, and its state disclosure requirements for corporate independent expenditures.
On August 5, 2010, plaintiffs filed a sweeping lawsuit challenging numerous aspects of Wisconsin campaign finance law, included the state’s definition of “political committee” and various disclosure and reporting requirements applicable to “independent expenditure organizations.” In 2014, a Seventh...