Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · REGISTER · 2000-07-10 · Federal Election Commission · Rules and Regulations

Rules and Regulations. Notice

346 words·~2 min read·/register/2000/07/10/00-17328

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 6714-01-M FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION [Notice 2000-14] Status of Civil Enforcement Actions Involving Coordinated Party Expenditures AGENCY: Federal Election Commission. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Commission has adopted a policy statement that provides guidance to candidates and political party committees on the status of certain civil enforcement actions under the Federal Election Campaign Act pending Supreme Court resolution of the issues presented in the Tenth Circuit's decision in *FEC* v. *Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee.* DATES: June 20, 2000. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Louise Wides, Assistant Staff Director, 999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 20463,
(202)694-1100 or
(800)424-9530. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a split decision, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit recently held that 2 U.S.C. 441a(d)(3), which limits the amount of a political party's coordinated expenditures in congressional elections, violates the First Amendment. *FEC* v. *Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee,* _F.3d _, 2000 WL 554688 (10th Cir. May 5, 2000). The Solicitor General has decided to seek review of that decision by the United States Supreme Court. Until the Supreme Court resolves the case, the Federal Election Commission will not file any action in the courts in the Tenth Circuit to enforce section 441a(d)(3). The Commission will, however, generally continue the administrative processing of matters concerning section 441a(d)(3). Only the Tenth Circuit has found section 441a(d)(3) unconstitutional, and its decision is not controlling outside that court's geographic jurisdiction. Furthermore, if the United States Supreme Court overrules the Tenth Circuit, the Court's decision upholding section 441a(d)(3) will apply retroactively to any activities in the interim that violate section 441a(d)(3), even in the Tenth Circuit. *See James B. Beam Distilling Co.* v. *Georgia,* 501 U.S. 529 (1991); *Harper* v. *Virginia Dep't of Taxation,* 509 U.S. 86 (1993). Therefore, anyone who chooses to act in contravention of section 441a(d)(3)—within or without the Tenth Circuit—before the Supreme Court rules in *Colorado* could be subject to liability for violating the statute if the *Colorado* decision is reversed. Dated: July 5, 2000. Darryl R. Wold, Chairman, Federal Election Commission. [FR Doc. 00-17328 Filed 7-7-00; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 1
Traces to 1 document
2 references not yet in our index
  • 501 U.S. 529
  • 509 U.S. 86
Citation graph
cites case law
Rules and Regulations
Notice
SCOTUS501 U.S. 529
SCOTUS509 U.S. 86
Cites 3Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.