The Courts
Reuters: U.S. court upholds federal contractor campaign finance ban
Lawrence Hurley
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled against three individual contractors who contended that the ban violated their constitutional rights to free speech and equal protection under the law.
Writing on behalf of an 11-judge panel, Chief Judge Merrick Garland wrote that “the concerns that spurred the original bar remain as important today as when the statute was enacted” in 1940.
The U.S. Federal Election Commission, which defended the law, said in court papers the ban was needed to prevent corruption and interference with government decision-making.
Forbes: Today’s Wagner Decision Encourages an Obama Order on Campaign Contributions by Federal Contractors
Charles Tiefer
Does the decision provide both legal and practical encouragement to the proposed Executive Order? To review that proposal, the Brennan Center for Justice noted that the top 24 federal contractors disclosed PAC contributions more than $30 million. And, said the Center, “There is nothing to stop these same companies, along with the various individual and entities affiliated with them, from contributing unlimited amounts to dark money groups who do not disclose some or all of their donors.”
More Soft Money Hard Law: Political Self-Dealing and Constitutional Innovation
Bob Bauer
In the Arizona case, the Court ruled that legislatures could be ousted by initiative from the redistricting process Arizona did not impose checks on legislative self-dealing; it relieved legislators of any role altogether…
In choosing this direction, the Court appears to have bought into what John Sides and Eric McGhee refer to as the “zombie myths” about the grossly anti-competitive effects of this mode of political self-dealing. Because it was redressing what it takes to be a major evil, the majority could sanction drastic measures on an enterprising construction of the constitutional text, concluding that “legislature” meant no role for the legislature. In sum, the Court treated the case before it as presenting a major dysfunction of governing institutions, justifying an extraordinary response, and it acted accordingly.
Campaign Finance
Washington Post: Republicans have won the battle over money in politics. Should anyone celebrate?
Paul Waldman
We should take a moment to remember what the IRS scandal was actually about. It wasn’t, as so many conservatives believe, a story of a nefarious White House-directed conspiracy to persecute Barack Obama’s enemies. In reality, there were a bunch of inadequately trained IRS employees attempting to apply a vaguely-worded law in the face of a dramatic increase in the number of applications they had to process after the 2010 Citizens United decision threw open the doors of campaign finance.
And the groups that suffered the horrific injury of having their 501(c)(4) applications take longer to process than they should have? Let’s not forget that they were, in fact, violating the spirit of the law. Without question. That’s true of both the conservative and liberal groups who got extra scrutiny, which they absolutely deserved, because they were plainly political groups masquerading as social welfare organizations.
IRS
Washington Examiner: New documents show Justice Dept. linked to IRS scandal
Sarah Westwood
The Justice Department knew “that some [IRS] employees have assembled their own set” of documents for the congressional probe in preparation for their scheduled testimonies and told IRS officials it would be “helpful to obtain them” from the witnesses…
A newly-published email sent Oct. 5, 2010 by an IRS official suggests the tax agency gave Justice Department staff as many as 1.25 million pages of documents in an effort to pursue criminal charges against certain nonprofits.
Town Hall: New Documents Show Extensive Collaboration Between IRS, DOJ to Criminally Prosecute Conservative Groups
Katie Pavlich
The goal was to stop the flow of other conservative non-profits, opposed to President Obama’s agenda, from applying for tax exempt status and therefore becoming more effective.
“These new documents show that the Obama IRS scandal is also an Obama DOJ and FBI scandal,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “The FBI and Justice Department worked with Lois Lerner and the IRS to concoct some reason to put President Obama’s opponents in jail before his reelection. And this abuse resulted in the FBI’s illegally obtaining confidential taxpayer information. How can the Justice Department and FBI investigate the very scandal in which they are implicated?”
Wisconsin
Washington Post: The Volokh Conspiracy: First Amendment challenge to search-warrant gag order
Eugene Volokh
In other words, given the overriding constitutional protections of the First Amendment, can a secrecy order, which is only allowed to impinge upon Wiesmueller’s fundamental First Amendment rights on the grounds that it promotes the effectiveness of a John Doe investigation, remain in force when the purpose for the infringement no longer exists? Hasn’t the limited justification for infringing Wiesmueller’s First Amendment rights evaporated with the conclusion of the John Doe, and aren’t Wiesmueller’s First Amendment rights restored to the extent that any prior restraint is without current effect?
Independent Groups
CBS: Nonprofit with secret donors, linked to Rubio super PAC, raises millions
Stephanie Condon
The organization Conservative Solutions Project has already spent $3.3 million on television and radio advertising, the Times reports, focusing on Rubio’s attacks of the Obama administration’s Iran nuclear negotiations. However, the group told the Times that it’s not devoted to any particular candidate.
As a tax-exempt “social welfare” organization — in the 501(c)(4) category — the group is allowed to spend unlimited sums of money on politics as long as politics isn’t its main focus. That’s why its advertising will be largely “issue based.”
In most cases, these “social welfare” nonprofits aren’t required to name their donors. A spokesman for Conservative Solutions Project told the Times it is unlikely to publicly name its donors.
Free Beacon: Steyer Kicks Off Campaign with $5 Million Super PAC Contribution
Lachlan Markay
NextGen has received less than $1,800 this year this year from individual contributors other than Steyer, FEC reports show.
Early indications suggest that Steyer will support Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. He and his wife held a fundraiser for Clinton last month at their California home.
Most of NextGen’s expenditures this year have gone to its political operations in key battleground states, primarily Iowa and New Hampshire. But in May it also passed along $20,000 to another group, Americans United for Change.
That group, which is part of a network run by the pro-Hillary Clinton political operative David Brock, frequently attacks billionaire political financiers.
Candidates and Campaigns
Washington Examiner: Democrats follow the leader, while Republicans demand competition
Timothy P. Carney
Debate is just another pernicious type of competition. It’s the competition of ideas, and “we’ve just got to put aside” such a clash of values and conclusions. Those were valuable before we knew for certain what to do.
The Left’s disdain for political debate flares up from time to time. Its campaign finance crusades these days are directed at quieting outside groups who criticize politicians. Obama’s IRS has targeted non-profits who step out of line. Oregon’s government has instructed a dissident bakery that it may not speak aloud its refusal to participate in gay wedding ceremonies.
