Speechnow.org v FEC

1524 Words7 Pages
In the evolution of campaign finance, cases have come up the chain of courts and found themselves in the lap of the Supreme Court of the United States. Speechnow.org was no exception to this lengthy journey. Speechnow.org, a nonprofit organization that supported candidates who stood firm with the First Amendment, was told to operate as a political committee. Under this classification, individuals were subject to obey collecting and spending limitations. These restrictions made it very hard for independent groups to be effective, so in 2008 David Keating, president of Speechnow.org went to court against the FEC. After the 2010 D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, Speechnow.org’s was to have free reign on donations, but would still need to register as a political committee. Keating was not happen with the appellate court’s decision. He knew that his case was Supreme Court worthy due to Buckley v. Valeo and Citizens United v FEC being precedent. With those cases setting an example for Speechnow.org, Keating decided to try and take this case to the Supreme Court. This case opened discussion on if it is constitutional to limit contributions to organizations that were spending their money on political independent expenditures. Speechnow.org also wished to address donor disclosure guidelines and FEC reporting requirements. Speechnow.org’s most leading argument was in the fact that they did not give donations to political candidates or political parties, a major component that is thought of be traditional standards to be labeled as a political committee. This argument was flawed, however, because the FEC defines a political committee as “any committee, club, association, or other group of persons that receives contributions of more tha... ... middle of paper ... ...There was no clear corruption in the past election season. It would make the most sense to wait until there is statistical evidence before worrying about the effects of these rulings. If there are issues some options for reform can be done by: making a constitutional amendment that applies to campaign finance, have the states enforce their own laws, or better enforce the laws we have now. Speechnow.org v. FEC brings out a few significant keys. First, the freedom of speech and the right to privacy are the regarded as high standing rulings in America. Those things have the ability to be corrupted, but, ultimately, the court’s will leave it is up to the citizens of the United States to make those decisions for themselves. Also, another significant factor is campaign finance is an ever-changing topic that has loopholes that need to be addressed on a case-to-case basis.
Open Document