Wyoming Liberty Group
CREW—Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington—opposes just about every free speech position on campaign finance law, and supplements its policy arguments with a good deal of obfuscation. Such is politics. Nevertheless, recent revelations in the IRS scandal show that CREW selectively applies its standards of “responsibility and ethics” to those they disagree with over policy matters.
This year’s parade of electoral horribles is out again. Every year that the Supreme Court hears a challenge to campaign finance laws a small band of self-titled reformers cry out in customary despair. These last two weeks have been no different following the Supreme Court’s decision in McCutcheon v. FEC.
CHEYENNE – Wyoming Liberty Group attorneys delivered a letter to the Wyoming Secretary of State and Attorney General today, asking them to immediately cease enforcement of a provision of the Wyoming Election Code that limits aggregate political contributions in state elections to $25,000. The letter follows a decision by the United States Supreme Court last week, McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, which overturned the aggregate contribution limit in federal law as an unconstitutional abridgement of free speech.
The latest issue of the Wyoming Law Review, the legal publication of the University of Wyoming College of Law, features our article “Publius Was Not a PAC: Reconciling Anonymous Political Speech, the First Amendment, and Campaign Finance Disclosure.” The article is now available on the Law Review’s website.
In case you missed it, there’s been quite a kerfuffle at the Supreme Court. The Court recently released its audio recording and transcript of Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness. Usually transcripts and audio recordings aren’t much to write home about, but in this case the Court admits to having doctored them.
So begins a friend-of-the-court (amici) brief from our friends at the Cato Institute and P.J. O’Rourke—“America’s leading political satirist”—in the case Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus, which is pending at the United States Supreme Court. The case is a challenge to an Ohio law that punishes false campaign speech, and the brief hilariously illustrates the pitfalls of such laws. Specifically, the brief utilizes O’Rourke’s legendary wit to show how easily political satire can be censored under the threat of a bureaucrat labeling it “false” speech:
CHEYENNE – Wyoming Liberty Group, joined by Republic Free Choice, submitted public comments to the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) today, discussing problems with the federal agency’s proposed rulemaking regarding non-profit advocacy groups. The proposed rules come less than a year after the agency admitted to invasive scrutiny of numerous Tea Party groups that applied for nonprofit status.