The writers and editors of State of Elections are currently on our summer hiatus. We will return with new content soon.
Four days write an essay later, the man who held these opinions had to operate on his king.
Toeing the Line: FEC, DOJ, and Coordination Between Super PACs and Candidates
By Staff Writer:
Five years ago, the Supreme Court’s decisions in Citizens United v. FEC and Speechnow v. FEC led to the creation of Super PACs, or independent expenditure-only political committees. Super PACs differ from candidate or political party committees in that they cannot contribute directly to candidates; they may only engage in independent spending on advertising, voter outreach, and the like. Furthermore, although Super PACs may support a particular candidacy, they are strictly prohibited from “coordinating” with candidate or political party committees. [Read more…] about Toeing the Line: FEC, DOJ, and Coordination Between Super PACs and Candidates
“War Chests” and Political Spending in Massachusetts: Are Unions and Corporations Similarly Situated?
By Allison Davis
In March of 2015, two family-owned companies headquartered in Massachusetts filed suit in state court challenging certain provisions of Massachusetts’ campaign finance laws. The provisions in question prohibit corporations and corporate PACs from contributing to candidates or political party committees, but permit labor unions and their PACs to directly contribute up to $15,000 per calendar year to candidates or parties. According to the plaintiffs’ complaint (filed as 1A Auto, Inc. v. Sullivan), this law represents a “lopsided ban” that stifles First Amendment-protected speech and associational rights for corporations. Additionally, the plaintiffs allege that the law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution by granting unions and their PACs a privilege that is forbidden to their corporate counterparts. [Read more…] about “War Chests” and Political Spending in Massachusetts: Are Unions and Corporations Similarly Situated?
William & Mary Election Law Society Co-President Published
By William & Mary Election Law Society
We are excited to announce that Allison Davis, one of this year’s co-presidents of the Election Law Society, has been accepted for publication in the William & Mary Business Law Review, Vol. 7 (2016). Davis’s note, “Presupposing Corruption: Access, Influence, and the Future of the Pay-to-Play Legal Framework” examines the Court’s shifting views on corruption, applies it to various pay-to-play laws currently in effect, and ultimately concludes that the legal and constitutional framework for much of pay-to-play law as it currently stands rests on shaky ground.
See more from McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP: http://www.paytoplaylawblog.com/2015/04/articles/first-amendment/pay-to-play-law-blog-makes-the-law-review/
American surgeons, in particular mcburney and fitz, were http://www.buyessayonline.ninja in the vanguard of the treatment of the disease.
Virginia State Board of Elections votes to scrap WINVote
By Staff Writer:
After reported irregularity with voting machines during the recent 2014 general election, the Virginia State Board of Elections voted to replace the potentially faulty WINVote devices. See a more detailed outline of the decision at: http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/electionacademy/2015/04/remarkable_virginia_it_agency.php
Something had contrived to bring about his downfall and his professional essay writer help banishment from the promised land.