Free Republic

At the end of the day today, the US Supreme Court accepted the CFR case (McConnell, et al). The Court will take the case early in its 2003 Term. It will come in a month early, 8 September, for a nearly unprecedented four hour argument. Briefs by all plaintiffs in the trial court, including Senator McConnell and the NRA, must be filed by 8 July. Defendants below must file by 5 August. Reply briefs must be filed by 21 August.

Arelis Lopez holds a sign reading 'Yes to information' and wears a bandanna over her mouth and hand cuffs as she protests with other members of 'Women for Freedom' against a media law proposed in Congress that will restrict graphic violence on television and reduce subjective censoring by radio and television channels, in Caracas, Venezuela, Tuesday, May 20, 2003. Opponents believe that if passed, the law could prohibit television and radio stations from criticizing the government. The sign at right reads 'We will go to jail in defense of freedom' and their shirts read 'Guards of freedom.' (AP Photo/Leslie Mazoch)...

Court Restores Campaign-Funding Limits i>By SHARON THEIMER, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON - A federal court Monday temporarily restored limits on political donations and advertising that it had struck down as unconstitutional, allowing 2004 candidates to operate under the law passed by Congress last year until the Supreme Court settles the matter. The Justice Department (news - web sites) and the law's sponsors had asked the three-judge panel handling the case to stay its entire May 2 ruling while the Supreme Court considers appeals. Interest groups, including the AFL-CIO and the National Rifle Association, had asked the lower court to block...

Democrats file complaint about ads against Daschle By Denise Ross, Journal Staff Writer WASHINGTON — Television ads that take Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., to task for opposing President Bush's tax-cut package break the new federal campaign-finance laws, Democratic leaders believe. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee filed a formal complaint against ad sponsor Club for Growth with the Federal Election Commission this week. The DSCC contends that Club for Growth uses unrestricted soft money to campaign against an individual candidate, something a new federal law says can be done only with limited hard money. "There can be no doubt that the...

<p>WASHINGTON The Republican National Committee asked a federal court Monday to keep in effect a decision on the new campaign finance law that lets the national party get involved in state and local elections this year. The RNC asked a three-judge panel handling challenges to the law to reject requests by others that it stay that section of its May 2 decision.</p>

<p>The National Rifle Association yesterday asked the Supreme Court to block part of the recent lower court ruling that rewrote the rules guiding outside interest groups running issue ads.</p> <p>The NRA's request could give the Supreme Court its first chance to rule on the special court's decision May 2 that invalidated or rewrote much of the campaign finance regulations that President Bush signed into law last year. The three-judge panel, created specifically to hear the case, ruled that political parties could not raise or spend "soft money," and changed the rules under which interest groups may run broadcast advertisements.</p>

High court must stop assault on free speech May 10, 2003 BY THOMAS ROESER John Adams, patriot and second U.S. president, had a good side and a bad side. The good Adams had a price on his life during the Revolution, yet saved a group of British soldiers from being railroaded to the gallows. But in 1798, the bad Adams tarnished his reputation by causing to be enacted a Sedition Act that threatened with fine and imprisonment anyone who ''shall write, print, utter or publish . . . scandalous and malicious . . . writings against the government of the...

A special three-member panel of federal judges ruled last week that major elements of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law violated the1st Amendment right of free speech.Specifically, the panel said Congress could not prohibit soft money contributions to political parties or election-time advertisements by interest groups that mention a federal candidate.The panel was split and wrote its own complicated law on both these matters, however. Soft money, it said, cannot be used for party-paid advertisements promoting or attacking a specific candidate, nor can advertisements paid for by interest groups support or attack a specific candidate even implicitly.The case will now go...

<p>WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Justice Department has joined sponsors of the new campaign finance law in asking a federal court to suspend its ruling that struck down some of the law's restrictions.</p> <p>Government attorneys defending the law asked the court for a stay Friday. The Justice Department, defending the law on behalf of it and the Federal Election Commission, sought the stay in consultation with the FEC.</p>

Sometimes reform is illegal HIGHLANDS, N.C., May 9 (UPI) -- The special three-judge trial court considering the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act ruled last week. By varying votes of 3-0 and 2-1 it determined that substantial portions of BCRA, sometimes known by the names of its two chief sponsors, Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Russell Feingold, D-Wis., violate the U.S. Constitution. When this law was passed, much of the mainstream media hailed it as a "Good Thing for America." The trial court has now ruled that it is largely an affront to the Constitution. The media did not mention, at the...

<p>The eye-glazing ruling Friday that overturned key parts of a major campaign-finance law tells us something is inherently wrong with a federal law that would give incumbents a virtually unbeatable advantage, would reduce voter turnout, would diminish the role of political parties whose purposes are clearly stated and favor special-interest groups whose real purposes are often hidden — even as it tramples our fundamental right to free political expression.</p>

ELECTIONS 2004 SPECIAL REPORT The Presidential Sweepstakes The race to challenge President Bush is on as Democrats begin lining up. Get full candidate profiles here. By Jim VandeHei and Dan Balz Washington Post Staff Writers Sunday, May 4, 2003; Page A04 If the new federal court ruling on campaign finance laws stands, corporations, union leaders and wealthy Americans will pour millions of dollars back into a political system that could look and operate much as it did before Congress "reformed" it with great fanfare a year ago, according to election law experts and political operatives from both parties. A special...

May 3, 2003 Half-Right on McCain-Feingold A three-judge federal court in Washington issued a split decision yesterday in a lawsuit challenging McCain-Feingold, the landmark law aimed at reducing the corrupting role money plays in politics. The decision upheld important parts of the law but struck down other sections that Congress rightly considered critical to reforming the electoral process, and that fully conform to the Constitution. The Supreme Court should quickly review the case and restore the law in its entirety. The panel that decided yesterday's case did not distinguish itself. The package it produced was so big, so ungainly and...

Contrary to press reports, yesterday's decision in McConnell v. FEC is not a big victory for free speech. It strikes down parts of the McCain-Feingold bill, but leaves other parts - including some of the most offensive - intact, and leaves the law more restrictive than it was before McCain-Feingold passed. Of course, the Supreme Court will have the final say, but I have been warning here for a year that those who think the courts will toss this law in the dumpster are whistling in the dark. Here are the basic contours of the 3 judge panel's ruling. First,...

<p>A federal panel yesterday struck down or rewrote most of the campaign finance reform law that Congress passed and President Bush signed into law last year.</p> <p>The three-judge panel overturned restrictions on how and when outside interest groups may run campaign advertisements against federal candidates but wrote new rules that some groups said are just as onerous. The court also overturned the part of the law that prohibits national political parties from raising so-called "soft money," though it upheld the law's ban on using the money to run television advertisements.</p>

reported 15:38 bloomberg news

FEC dismisses action against ‘DeLay group’ By Jonathan E. Kaplan and Alexander Bolton The Federal Election Commission (FEC) has dismissed a complaint against the Leadership Forum, a GOP fundraising group, vindicating Susan Hirschmann and former Rep. Bill Paxon (R-N.Y.), the organization’s president and vice president. Hirschmann, former chief of staff to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), and Paxon, an elite GOP lobbyist, had set up the group to raise soft money to fund television issue ads and other activities that would benefit Republican candidates in the upcoming election. “The FEC ruling validates what we have said all along…the Leadership...

We have no idea how the three-judge panel that’s reviewing the McCain-Feingold campaign law will rule. But we do know that a failure quickly to break the legal logjam that’s gripping that panel augurs dire consequences for the 2004 elections. The undue delay may have already doomed chances for the U.S. Supreme Court to consider last year’s reform legislation before Congress recesses for the summer. The longer it takes for the lower court to render its verdict, the harder it is going to be to have clear rules firmly in place next year when the nation next needs to elect...

<p>LANSING -- Gov. Jennifer Granholm and the state Democratic Party are asking corporations and unions to donate $25,000 to a new political fund intended to help get their message across to voters.</p> <p>The names of the donors to Partnership for Progress and most details about how the money is spent will be kept secret, Democratic Party Chairman Melvin "Butch" Hollowell confirmed.</p>

<p>The Wall Street Journal's Washington Wire says the new "campaign-finance law boosts Republicans' money edge. In first-quarter reports due soon at the Federal Election Commission, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is expected to show $7 million -- its biggest take of regulated 'hard money' for House candidates ever. But Republicans' House committee has raised $22 million. Democrats got more from unregulated 'soft money,' now banned."</p>