Judge R. Brooke Jackson's final judgment and order, entered on October 22, 2014.

It is ordered that: 1. The trial date of July 7, 2009 is vacated; 2. Count three of the indictment is dismissed without prejudice; and 3. Any outstanding bond is exonerated.

Case is restored to the calendar for reargument. The parties are directed to file supplemental briefs addressing the following question: For the proper disposition of this case, should the Court overrule either or both Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, 494 U.S. 652 (1990), and the part of McConnell v. Federal Election Comm’n, 540 U.S. 93 (2003), which addresses the facial validity of Section 203 of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, 2 U.S.C. §441b? 

District Court grants intervention. 

It is ordered that plaintiffs' application for a three-judge court is denied.

The Court grants defendant's motion to dismiss case.

The lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 - eleven suits brought by more than 80 plaintiffs - were consolidated asMcConnell v. FEC. The defendants in the case were the U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Election Commission; the Act's principal congressional sponsors - Senators McCain, Feingold, Snowe and Jeffords and Congressmen Meehan and Shays -were intervenor-defendants. The Legal Center 's attorneys were among the counsel to the congressional sponsors.

A three-judge trial panel of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a mixed decision on the law's constitutionality on May 1, 2003 .

The U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision on December 10, 2004 , upholding all key aspects of the Reform Act.