Order of the Montana Supreme Court upholding the State's restrictions on corporate independent political expenditures. 

Montana Supreme Court's order upholding the State's restrictions on corporate independent political expenditures.

FEC responding to Mr. Hoersting, Backer and Najvar's advisory opinion request on behalf of Shaun McCutcheon, concerning the application of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended (the “Act”), and Commission regulations to Mr. McCutcheon’s desire to make aggregated contributions to Federal candidates totaling $54,400 during the 2011-2012 election cycle. The Commission concludes that the Act prohibits Mr. McCutcheon from making aggregated contributions to Federal Candidates in excess of $46,200 during the 2011-2012 election cycle.

FEC responding to Stephen Hoersting and Dan Backer's  advisory opinion request on behalf of the Tea Party Leadership Fund (“TPLF”), Sean Bielat, and John Raese, concerning the application of the Federal Election Campaign Act (the “Act”) and Commission regulations to contributions by an aspiring multicandidate political committee to Federal candidates.  The Commission concludes that, at this time, the Act prohibits TPLF from making contributions over $2,500 per election to Mr. Bielat and Mr. Raese, and that it currently prohibits Mr. Bielat and Mr. Raese from accepting such contributions.

Chief Justice Kennedy announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion, in which Scailia, Kennedy, and Alito joined. Thomas filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Breyer filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan joined. The judgment of the District Court is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings. 

Order for re-argument. 

Central District of California District Court’s order to dismiss count three. 

Central District of California District Court's order.  The Court grants in part and denies in part Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Indictment. Counts One and Two are dismissed.

Supreme Court decision. The judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer joined. Roberts filed a dissenting opinion, in which Scalia, Thomas, and Alito joined. Scalia filed a dissenting opinion.

D.C. District Court scheduling order, with dates that each party must file their briefs and documents. 

Supreme Court opinion on Citizens United. Justice Kennedy's majority opinion found that the BCRA §203 prohibition of all independent expenditures by corporations and unions violated the First Amendment's protection of free speech. The majority wrote, "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.

Western District of Washington District Court order denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. 

Order of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denying defendant-appellee’s petition for rehearing. 

Decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The judgment of the district court is affirmed. 

Southern District of Ohio District Court’s order.Plaintiff’s Motion to consolidate the preliminary injunction as to with a trial on the merits, as to these issues, is granted. Plaintiff’s Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction is granted in part and denied in part. 

Plaintiff, Ohio Right to Life Society and Ohio Elections Commission determine that the issues expressly set forth in this Consent Decree are severable from the other issues that remain pending in this case. In addition, the Parties agree that there is no just reason for delay in entering final judgment as to the issues and claims set forth in the Consent Decree.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision before Chief Judge Jones and Circuit Judges King, Jolly, Davis, Smith, Wiener, Garza, Benavides, Stewart, Dennis, Clement, Prado, Owen, Elrod, Southwick, and Haynes. The Court finds that none of the challenged provisions unconstitutionally infringe upon the rights of the Plaintiffs to engage in political debate and discussion.

District Court’s order granting leave to plaintiff to file the amended complaint. The Court believes that the most appropriate action under the scenario is to grant the motion to amend and to permit Defendants to challenge, should they so choose, the Amended Verified Complaint by way of a motion to dismiss. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to amend (Doc. 65) is granted. Because Defendants’ motion to dismiss on jurisdictional grounds (Doc. 56) does not address the additional facts in the amended complaint, which arguably cure any jurisdictional deficiency, it is denied as moot.

District Court of Connecticut’s Permanent Injunction order given by District Judge Stefan R. Underhill. Judgment is entered in favor of the plaintiffs Green Party of Connecticut, S. Michael DeRosa, and the Libertarian Party with respect to counts two and three because the CEP’s excess and independent expenditure trigger provisions burden the plaintiffs’ First Amendment speech rights. Judgment is also entered in favor of the plaintiffs the ACL, Barry Williams, Anne C. Robinson, Elizabeth Gallo, Joanne P. Phillips, Roger C. Vann with respect to the claims in count four that the Connecticut Campaign Finance Reform Act (“CFRA”)’s prohibition of lobbyists making and soliciting campaign contributions, and state contractors soliciting campaign contributions, violates the First Amendment.