Campaign Finance Law and the Constitutionality of the "Millionaire's Amendment" PDF Download
Are you looking for read ebook online? Search for your book and save it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Download Campaign Finance Law and the Constitutionality of the "Millionaire's Amendment" PDF full book. Access full book title Campaign Finance Law and the Constitutionality of the "Millionaire's Amendment" by L. Paige Whitaker. Download full books in PDF and EPUB format.
Author: L. Paige Whitaker
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
In a 5-to-4 decision, the Supreme Court struck down a provision of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), also known as the McCain-Feingold law, establishing increased contribution limits for congressional candidates whose opponents significantly self-finance their campaigns. This provision is frequently referred to as the "Millionaire's Amendment." The Court found that the burden imposed on expenditures of personal funds is not justified by the compelling governmental interest of lessening corruption or the appearance of corruption and, therefore, held that the law is unconstitutional in violation of the First Amendment.
Author: L. Paige Whitaker
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
In a 5-to-4 decision, the Supreme Court struck down a provision of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), also known as the McCain-Feingold law, establishing increased contribution limits for congressional candidates whose opponents significantly self-finance their campaigns. This provision is frequently referred to as the "Millionaire's Amendment." The Court found that the burden imposed on expenditures of personal funds is not justified by the compelling governmental interest of lessening corruption or the appearance of corruption and, therefore, held that the law is unconstitutional in violation of the First Amendment.
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 0
Get Book Here
Book Description
The Court found that the burden imposed on expenditures of personal funds is not justified by the compelling governmental interest of lessening corruption or the appearance of corruption and, therefore, held that the law is unconstitutional in violation of the First Amendment. [...] In 2006, after the Federal Election Commission (FEC) informed Davis that it had reason to believe that he had violated BCRA's disclosure requirements for self-financing candidates by failing to report personal expenditures during the 2004 election cycle, Davis filed suit in the U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking declaration that the Millionaire's Amendment was unconstitution [...] Supreme Court Ruling Reversing the three-judge district court decision, in a 5-to-4 vote, the Supreme Court in FEC v. Davis7 invalidated the Millionaire's Amendment as lacking a compelling governmental interest in violation of the First Amendment. [...] In fact, the Court concluded that if a candidate vigorously exercises the right to use personal funds, it creates a fundraising advantage for his or her opponents.15 In its 1976 landmark decision Buckley v. Valeo,16 the Supreme Court upheld a provision of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) providing presidential candidates with the option to receive public funds on the condition that they co [...] Responding to the FEC's argument that the statute's "asymmetrical limits" are justified because they level the playing field for candidates of differing personal wealth, the Court pointed out that its jurisprudence offers no support for the proposition that this rationale constitutes a compelling governmental interest.
Author: Ronald Collins
Publisher: Top Five Books LLC
ISBN: 1938938143
Category : Law
Languages : en
Pages : 319
Get Book Here
Book Description
“A brilliant discussion of campaign finance in America…a must for all who care about the American political system.” —Erwin Chemerinsky “Thorough, dispassionate, and immensely readable.” —Floyd Abrams On April 2, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down aggregate limits on how much money individuals could contribute to political candidates, parties, and committees. The McCutcheon v. FEC decision fundamentally changes how people (and corporations, thanks to Citizens United) can fund campaigns, opening the floodgates for millions of dollars in new spending, which had been curtailed by campaign finance laws going back to the early 1970s. When Money Speaks is the definitive—and the first—book to explain and dissect the Supreme Court’s controversial ruling in McCutcheon, including analysis of the tumultuous history of campaign finance law in the U.S. and the new legal and political repercussions likely to be felt from the Court’s decision. McCutcheon has been billed as “the sequel to Citizens United,” the decision giving corporations the same rights as individuals to contribute to political campaigns. Lauded by the Right as a victory for free speech, and condemned by the Left as handing the keys of our government to the rich and powerful, the Court’s ruling has inflamed a debate that is not going to go away anytime soon, with demands for new laws and even a constitutional amendment on the Left—while many on the Right (including Justice Clarence Thomas in his concurring opinion) call for an end to all contribution limits. Two of the nation’s top First Amendment scholars—Ronald Collins and David Skover—have produced a highly engaging, incisive account of the case, including exclusive interviews with petitioner Shaun McCutcheon and other key players, as well as an eye-opening history of campaign finance law in the U.S.
Author: Frederick Gilbert Slabach
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Law
Languages : en
Pages : 638
Get Book Here
Book Description
This new edition assembles the scholarship of some of the most prominent critics and supporters of jurisprudence on the U.S. Constitution and campaign finance. Contributors include academics, judges, reform advocates and practitioners, including Columbia law professor Richard Briffault, Chicago law professor Case R. Sunstei, former FCC Commission Chairman Reed Hundt, Democracy 21 president Fred Wertheimer, and former U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Judge J. Skelly Wright. Among many important topics, the new edition discusses the concept of money as speech, the possible compelling state interests necessary to justify government limitations, and various alternative methods of regulating campaign finance. The new edition includes discussions of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (the so-called McCain-Feingold Legislation), the 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision in McConnell v. FEC, and entities organized under Internal Revenue Code section 527. The organization of the materials allows the addition of campaign finance module for existing Constitutional Law, Election Law, First Amendment, and Political Science courses or the creation of a separate course on this important subject. "A well-rounded collection of contrasting arguments." -- Law & Politics Book Review
Author: Jacqueline R. Kinney
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 330
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author: Robert C. Post
Publisher: Harvard University Press
ISBN: 0674369610
Category : Law
Languages : en
Pages : 265
Get Book Here
Book Description
The Supreme Court’s 5–4 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which struck down a federal prohibition on independent corporate campaign expenditures, is one of the most controversial opinions in recent memory. Defenders of the First Amendment greeted the ruling with enthusiasm, while advocates of electoral reform recoiled in disbelief. Robert C. Post offers a new constitutional theory that seeks to reconcile these sharply divided camps. Post interprets constitutional conflict over campaign finance reform as an argument between those who believe self-government requires democratic participation in the formation of public opinion and those who believe that self-government requires a functioning system of representation. The former emphasize the value of free speech, while the latter emphasize the integrity of the electoral process. Each position has deep roots in American constitutional history. Post argues that both positions aim to nurture self-government, which in contemporary life can flourish only if elections are structured to create public confidence that elected officials are attentive to public opinion. Post spells out the many implications of this simple but profound insight. Critiquing the First Amendment reasoning of the Court in Citizens United, he also shows that the Court did not clearly grasp the constitutional dimensions of corporate speech. Blending history, constitutional law, and political theory, Citizens Divided explains how a Supreme Court case of far-reaching consequence might have been decided differently, in a manner that would have preserved both First Amendment rights and electoral integrity.
Author: Robert Post
Publisher: Harvard University Press
ISBN: 0674729005
Category : Law
Languages : en
Pages : 265
Get Book Here
Book Description
First Amendment defenders greeted the Court’s Citizens United ruling with enthusiasm, while electoral reformers recoiled in disbelief. Post offers a constitutional theory that seeks to reconcile these sharply divided camps, and he explains how the case might have been decided in a way that would preserve free speech and electoral integrity.
Author: United States. Congress. House. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Law
Languages : en
Pages : 182
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author: Samantha Sellinger
Publisher: Princeton University Press
ISBN: 1400824710
Category : Political Science
Languages : en
Pages : 301
Get Book Here
Book Description
At a time when campaign finance reform is widely viewed as synonymous with cleaning up Washington and promoting political equality, Bradley Smith, a nationally recognized expert on campaign finance reform, argues that all restriction on campaign giving should be eliminated. In Unfree Speech, he presents a bold, convincing argument for the repeal of laws that regulate political spending and contributions, contending that they violate the right to free speech and ultimately diminish citizens' power. Smith demonstrates that these laws, which often force ordinary people making modest contributions of cash or labor to register with the Federal Election Commission or various state agencies, fail to accomplish their stated objectives. In fact, they have worked to entrench incumbents in office, deaden campaign discourse, burden grassroots political activity with needless regulation, and distance Americans from an increasingly professional, detached political class. Rather than attempting to plug "loopholes" in campaign finance law or instituting taxpayer-financed campaigns, Smith proposes a return to core First Amendment values of free speech and an unfettered right to engage in political activity. Smith finds that campaign contributions have little corrupting effect on the legislature and shows that an unrestrained system of contributions and spending actually enhances equality. More money, not less, is needed in the political system, Smith concludes. Unfree Speech draws upon constitutional law and historical research to explain why campaign finance regulation is doomed and to illustrate the potentially drastic costs of efforts to make it succeed. Whatever one thinks about the impact of money on electoral politics, no one should take a final stand without reading Smith's controversial and important arguments.
Author: United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on the Constitution
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Campaign funds
Languages : en
Pages : 148
Get Book Here
Book Description
