[EL] Danielczyk/McCutcheon update

[Rick Hasen]

    If the Supreme Court Agrees to Hear the Two Pending Campaign Finance
    Cases... <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=47328>

Posted on February 15, 2013 10:54 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=47328> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

the order won't come 
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/02/todays-orders-no-grants-yet/> before 
Tuesday at 9:30 am.

If I had to make a prediction, I'd predict that the Court takes 
theMcCutcheon <http://electionlawblog.org/?s=mccutcheon>case involving 
the aggregate contribution limit but not the Danielczyk 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?s=danielczyk>case, about the 
constitutionality of the ban on direct corporate contributions to 
candidates. McCutcheon is coming up on appeal and not cert, and a 
decision to not hear the case counts as a ruling on the merits. Also, 
there's no circuit split on the corporate contribution case, and there's 
a strong anti-circumvention argument against allowing corporate 
contributions: an individual could easily evade the individual 
contribution limits through setting up an unlimited number of 
corporations to make additional contributions.

How confident am I in this prediction about what the Court will do? Not 
very.

*UPDATE:* Lawrence Hurley reports 
<https://twitter.com/lawrencehurley/status/302508483088117760>that 
Danielczyk has been taken off calendar, meaning we won't get a ruling on 
the cert petition one way or the other on Tuesday.  Not clear what this 
means---there are all kinds of reasons why cases get relisted.  But 
here's one intriguing possibility: the Court might decide to hear (note 
probable jurisdiction in) /McCutcheon/, and it could hold /Danielczyk/ 
until that case is resolved---both cases involve separate issues 
concerning campaign contributions.

/McCutcheon /is especially intriguing because it may be the first time 
that the Court, despite all the twists and turns of campaign finance 
law, could actually overrule part of the key 1976 /Buckley v. Valeo /case.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D47328&title=If%20the%20Supreme%20Court%20Agrees%20to%20Hear%20the%20Two%20Pending%20Campaign%20Finance%20Cases%E2%80%A6&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29> | Comments Off |

-- 
Rick Hasen
Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
UC Irvine School of Law
401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
Irvine, CA 92697-8000
949.824.3072 - office
949.824.0495 - fax
rhasen at law.uci.edu
http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html
http://electionlawblog.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130215/7e116409/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130215/7e116409/attachment.png>