Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Digital Commons Network

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

PDF

Series

Faculty Scholarship

First Amendment

Election Law

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network

Constitutional Law And The Presidential Nomination Process, Richard Briffault Jan 2020

Constitutional Law And The Presidential Nomination Process, Richard Briffault

Faculty Scholarship

The Constitution says nothing about the presidential nominating process and has had little direct role in the evolution of that process from congressional caucuses to party national conventions to our current primary-dominated system of selecting convention delegates. Yet, constitutional law is a factor in empowering and constraining the principal actors in the nomination process and in shaping the framework for potential future changes.

The constitutional law of the presidential nomination process operates along two axes: government-party, and state-national. The government-party dimension focuses on the tension between the states and the federal government in writing the rules for and administering the …


Davis V. Fec: The Roberts Court's Continuing Attack On Campaign Finance Reform, Richard Briffault Jan 2009

Davis V. Fec: The Roberts Court's Continuing Attack On Campaign Finance Reform, Richard Briffault

Faculty Scholarship

In Davis v. FEC, decided on the last day of the October 2007 Term, a closely divided Supreme Court invalidated the so-called Millionaires' Amendment, which was a provision added to the Federal Election Campaign Act ("FECA") as part of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act ("BCRA") of 2002 to make it easier for Senate and House candidates to raise private contributions when they run against an opponent who uses a substantial amount of personal wealth to pay for his or her campaign. From the reform perspective, the loss of the Millionaires' Amendment was not of great moment. The Amendment was …


The Return Of Spending Limits: Campaign Finance After Landell V. Sorrell, Richard Briffault Jan 2005

The Return Of Spending Limits: Campaign Finance After Landell V. Sorrell, Richard Briffault

Faculty Scholarship

On August 18, 2004, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the First Amendment, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Buckley v. Valeo, does not preclude mandatory limitations on campaign expenditures.In Landell v. Sorrell, the court concluded that limitations imposed by the state of Vermont on candidate spending in state election campaigns are "supported by [the state's] compelling interests in safeguarding Vermont's democratic process from 1) the corruptive influence of excessive and unbridled fundraising and 2) the effect that perpetual fundraising has on the time of candidates and elected officials." To …


Prosecuting Conduit Campaign Contributions - Hard Time For Soft Money, Robert D. Probasco Jul 2001

Prosecuting Conduit Campaign Contributions - Hard Time For Soft Money, Robert D. Probasco

Faculty Scholarship

In recent years, there have been several high-profile prosecutions for violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act, involving contributions nominally by one individual but funded or reimbursed by another individual deemed to be the true contributor. Prosecutions of these “conduit contribution” cases have been surprising in at least three significant respects. First, the prosecutions have been based on violations of FECA’s reporting requirements and may not have involved any violations of the substantive prohibitions or limitations of contributions. Second, the defendants were the donors rather than campaign officials who actually filed reports with FECA. Third, the cases were prosecuted as …


Spending Limits And The Squandering Of Candidates' Time, Vincent A. Blasi Jan 1997

Spending Limits And The Squandering Of Candidates' Time, Vincent A. Blasi

Faculty Scholarship

Today I begin with a narrow agenda, a single idea, but an extravagant ambition. My narrow agenda is that I wish to address only the topic of campaign spending limits, and only the issue of their constitutionality in the face of First Amendment objections. The policy questions regarding whether spending limits are equitable, efficacious, and/or enforceable are deeply difficult and interesting but beyond my ken on this occasion.

My single idea is that spending limits are best justified on the ground that they protect candidates for office from having to devote an inordinate amount of their time to the task …