Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee v. Federal Election Commission
Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee v. Federal Election Commission is a 1996 United States Supreme Court case in which the Colorado Republican Party challenged 1974 updates to the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), which restricted the amount a state or national party could spend on congressional races.[1] The court determined that since the Committee's expenditures on radio advertisements (the particular expenditures under question in the case) were not coordinated with any candidate, they were independent expenditures and therefore not subject to coordinated campaign contribution limits established in the FECA.[2]
Background
In 1986, the Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee ran radio advertisements about a Democratic candidate's voting record. The Federal Election Commission considered the advertisement a coordinated expenditure (meaning, in their view, it was coordinated with a candidate in order to influence an election) and subject to campaign contribution limits established in the Federal Election Campaign Act. The FEC held that the Committee was in violation of campaign limits because its entire budget for coordinated advertisements was already accounted for, which meant the radio advertisement put total expenditures over the lawful limit. The Committee, however, "characterized the ad as a generic voter education expense" and not in violation of federal campaign contribution limits. The case spent several years in lower courts before finally reaching the Supreme Court in 1996.[2]
The Brennan Center for Justice filed a brief with the Supreme Court related to the case, which argued that the 1976 Supreme Court decision in Buckley v. Valeo should be overturned and the distinction between campaign contributions and independent expenditures eliminated.[1]
Decision
On June 26, 1996, Justice Breyer delivered the majority opinion, joined by O'Connor and Souter. Stevens and Ginsberg dissented. The remaining members concurred with the majority and dissented in parts.
The Court ruled that the coordinated expenditure limits in the FECA could not be held against the Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee's radio advertisement expenditures, since the Committee had not coordinated with any candidate. Although there were three Republican candidates seeking nomination in the race for which the advertisements were run, the Court determined that the advertisements were "developed by the Colorado Party independently and not pursuant to any general or particular understanding with a candidate."[2]
The Court, which had the authority under the Buckley decision to limit political party independent expenditures if there was the appearance of, or potential for, corruption, found that the potential for corruption in this instance did not exist. Consequently, the Court ruled that the sections of the FECA limiting political parties' ability to make independent expenditures in congressional races were "precluded" by the First Amendment.[2]
Though the Court ruled on independent expenditures, they did not rule on a challenge brought by the Committee about the constitutionality of coordinated limits. The case was then remanded to the lower courts.[2]
Remand
On remand, the United States District Court for the District of Colorado determined that the FEC had not adequately shown that "coordinated party expenditures had to be limited to prevent corruption or its appearance." The Court argued that coordinated party expenditures were "indistinguishable in substance" from a candidate's campaign expenditure. The Supreme Court had ruled since Buckley that candidate expenditures could not be limited, so the District Court felt that coordinated party expenditures also could not be regulated.[2]
In 2000, the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit affirmed the "district court decision that the coordinated party expenditure limits at 2 U.S.C. 441a(d)(3) are unconstitutional."
On June 25, 2001, however, the Supreme Court overturned the Court of Appeals decision and "ruled that party coordinated expenditures, unlike party expenditures made independently of any candidate or campaign, may be restricted to 'minimize circumvention of [individual] contribution limits."[2]
Recent news
This section links to a Google news search for the term "Colorado + Republican + Federal + Campaign + Committee + v. + Federal Election Commission"
See also
External links
Footnotes
