[EL] "Stop Reckless ... Instability" is not Unstable

[Steve Hoersting]

Dan's latest lawsuit is not the barn burner it appears to be; it is
actually well within the wheelhouse of existing precedent.

Plaintiffs ask the court to remove the disparity between permissible
contributions to political entities by multi-candidate committees, on the
one hand, and contributions to political entities by those PACs that have
yet to attain multi-candidate committee status, on the other.

Lawyers who become interested in the litigation will likely find that the
1976-Post-*Buckley* Amendments to campaign finance law -- instrumental in
removing corruption concerns (*see* *Buckley, *424 U.S. at 38) the Court
may have had with the aggregate limits to party committees struck down in
*McCutcheon* -- will also serve to strike down the disparity between
multi-candidate committees and other PACs.

That is, if the case can get to the SCOTUS through the newly minted,
post-filibuster-rule, DC Circuit. Multicandidate committee status is not a
BCRA provision.

-- 
Stephen M. Hoersting
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140416/e0103079/attachment.html>