The other candidate is lazy, soft on crime; a politician. These are the accusations blaring over Alabama airwaves, but you would be mistaken to think that 2012 White House hopefuls have begun campaigning. No, these are the television spots for Alabama Supreme Court candidates. These messages and others like them are often funded by large interest groups like the Alabama Democratic Party, and linked with the plaintiffs’ bar, the Business Council of Alabama, and groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers. According to the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law, Alabama’s judicial elections are the most expensive in the nation, with Supreme Court candidates having raised $40.9 million from 2000-2009. [Read more…] about Voters Demand a Fair and Impartial Judiciary: NOW WHAT?!
Citizens United
Committees and Campaigns: South Carolina Federal Court Tightens Definition and Loosens Regulations
In the wake of last year’s Citizen’s United ruling, there’s been much deliberation, speculation, and anticipation about how the world of federal campaign finance will be changed – and now the states are getting into the mix. Decisions in Colorado, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Utah paved the way for Judge Terry Wooten of the United States District Court for South Carolina to rule that the state’s definition of “committee” is unconstitutional in South Carolina Citizens for Life v. Krawcheck. Granting partial summary judgment in favor of South Carolina Citizens for Life (SCCL) on their constitutional claim that the South Carolina Ethics Commission was overbroad in defining “committee,” Judge Wooten may have opened the door to influential campaign contributions from organizations whose primary purpose is not to influence elections. [Read more…] about Committees and Campaigns: South Carolina Federal Court Tightens Definition and Loosens Regulations
Image is Everything: Is Disclosure an Effective Check on Corporate Political Donations?
In his January State of the Union address President Obama warned that the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United would result in American elections being “bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse foreign entities.” 
President Obama wasn’t alone in his disapproval of the Supreme Court’s decision. The Pew Center reports that a large majority—65%—of Americans also disapprove of the decision. However, the gubernatorial race in Minnesota is demonstrating that corporate donations are not completely unchecked. In fact, the biggest factor limiting a corporation’s exercise of this First Amendment right may be the First Amendment itself.
Minnesota’s upcoming gubernatorial election has become the focus of corporation’s contributions to political organizations because of a Minnesota law requiring organizations to publicly disclose contributions over $100. The law does not set any limitation on the amount of a donation, but if it is more than $100, the public and the press are going to know about it. According to two Minnesota political organizations, the disclosure requirements are unconstitutional. [Read more…] about Image is Everything: Is Disclosure an Effective Check on Corporate Political Donations?
Could Citizens United be a Paper Tiger?
Is it possible that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission was all bark, no bite? It may be too early to tell, but at least in the race for Virginia’s 2nd congressional district, the ruling has yet to make a discernible impact.
Citizens United, handed down last January, invalidated portions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 which regulated so-called “electioneering” communications on First Amendment grounds. The reaction to the court’s decision was swift and sharply divided. The Wall Street Journal celebrated the ruling as a victory for free speech, writing, “[i]n a season of marauding government, the Constitution rides to the rescue one more time.” The conservative Cato Institute lauded the ruling, opining that it was a recognition of the principle that “equalizing speech is never a government interest.” On the other end of the spectrum, the New York Times openly lamented the decision, saying it marked a return to “the robber baron era of the 19th century.” People for the American Way went so far as to call for a constitutional amendment overturning the decision. [Read more…] about Could Citizens United be a Paper Tiger?
Weekly Wrap-Up
Virginia governor Robert McDonnell is outpacing his Democratic predecessors in restoring voting rights to felons. McDonnell, known as a law-and-order attorney general, has approved 780 of 889 applications — approximately 88 percent of applications — since taking office in January. His predecessors, Democrats Timothy Kaine and Mark Warner, restored the rights of 4,402 and 3,486 felons, respectively. McDonnell revamped the process for restoring voting rights to felons, reducing the wait time for nonviolent felons to two years, allowing applicants to submit documents online, and self-imposing a deadline of 60 days after the application is complete to make a decision. Even as this process continues, however, 300,000 people in Virginia remain disenfranchised.
Rahm Emanuel may be out of a job. The same day that the White House announced he was leaving his post as Chief of Staff to run for mayor of Chicago, attorney Burt Odelson pointed out a 1871 law requiring candidates to live in their jurisdiction for the year before the election. Since Emanuel leased out his house in Chicago while he was working in DC, this may block him from running for Mayor.
[Read more…] about Weekly Wrap-Up