IRS
Wall Street Journal: House Votes to Hold Former IRS Official Lois Lerner in Contempt
By John D. McKinnon
The House voted Wednesday to hold former Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner in contempt of Congress for declining to answer lawmakers’ questions, a move that carries political significance and could set a legal precedent.
The largely party-line vote was 231 to 187, with a handful of Democrats backing the measure.
Republicans said the contempt citation was necessary to help find the truth about what happened in the alleged IRS targeting, starting in early 2010, of tea-party groups seeking nonprofit tax status. Republicans are hoping the matter will go to court, and a judge will require Ms. Lerner to answer their questions about what occurred.
SCOTUS/Judiciary
Washington Times: RNC set to join landmark suit taking on campaign limits
By Ralph Z. Hallow
Republicans have long argued that “soft money” spending limits imposed on political parties by the Federal Election Commission in the aftermath of the 2002 McCain-Feingold law have punished the RNC and state political parties while letting pro-Democrat unions spend unlimited money to organize voters.
The lawsuit specifically will ask the courts to allow national and state parties to form super PACs that can raise and spend unlimited amounts on election efforts, something the FEC has prohibited.
“We think this will put the final nail in the coffin of the McCain-Feingold law,” Louisiana Republican Party Chairman Roger Villere said in an interview.
NY Times: Conflicting Rulings Cloud Wisconsin Campaign Finance Inquiry
By Monica Davey
On Tuesday, a federal judge halted the investigation, giving a momentary victory to Mr. Walker, a Republican who is seeking re-election this fall and is sometimes mentioned as a presidential possibility for 2016. The investigation, the details of which are murky because of tight state secrecy rules, had clouded Mr. Walker’s political prospects and become a focus of attention for his critics.
But on Wednesday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit stayed the injunction, calling for a lower court review of an earlier, separate appeal in the case.
Wall Street Journal: Political Speech Wins in Wisconsin
Editorial
Prosecutors were able to leak details with impunity until one of the targets, Eric O’Keefe, went public to us last November about the abuse of power. He also sought Washington attorney David Rivkin to file a federal civil-rights lawsuit to shut down the probe, and that’s what Judge Randa responded to on Tuesday.
An injunction must cross a high legal bar, and Judge Randa found that Mr. O’Keefe’s lawsuit had a high likelihood of success on the merits while the probe also caused him irreparable harm. Prosecutors must have been stunned because they immediately appealed to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals and even filed a second motion seeking an immediate stay of Judge Randa’s order.
The Seventh Circuit granted the temporary stay late Wednesday on a technicality and said prosecutors did not have to destroy evidence they had collected. But Judge Randa’s injunction is still a personal and political humiliation for prosecutors, the sort of rebuke that happened to racists in the Old South, not righteous liberals.
FEC
Washington Examiner: FEC chair warns that conservative media like Drudge Report and Sean Hannity face regulation — like PACs
By Paul Bedard
But Goodman cited several examples where the FEC has considered regulating conservative media, including Sean Hannity’s radio show and Citizens United’s movie division. Those efforts to lift the media exemption died in split votes at the politically evenly divided board, often with Democrats seeking regulation.
Liberals over the years have also pushed for a change in the Federal Communications Commission’s “fairness doctrine” to cut of conservative voices, and retiredSupreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens has delighted Democrats recently with a proposed Constitutional amendment that some say could force the media to stop endorsing candidates or promoting issues.
“The picking and choosing has started to occur,” said Goodman. “There are some in this building that think we can actually regulate” media, added Goodman, a Republican whose chairmanship lasts through December. And if that occurs, he said, “then I am concerned about disparate treatment of conservative media.”
State and Local
California –– LA Times: Scaled-back campaign finance disclosure bill clears Assembly
By Melanie Mason
The Assembly approved legislation seeking to shed light on political money Monday, breathing new life into a bill that had previously stumbled in the state Senate.
The bill aims to increase disclosure of the sources of campaign money by setting new thresholds under which groups spending money in California elections would have to reveal their donors.
Maine –– Portland Press Herald: Group aims for stronger Maine Clean Election Act
By Steve Mistler
AUGUSTA — A Maine group working to limit the influence of money in politics rolled out a new proposal Tuesday to strengthen the Maine Clean Election Act by providing more money to publicly financed candidates, requiring interest groups to disclose sources of funding on campaign ads and increasing penalties for election law violations.
Virginia –– AP: Supreme Court rulings on campaign finance limits favor McDonnell defense arguments
By Alan Suderman
RICHMOND, Va. — The Supreme Court’s determination that many limits on big-money political contributions violate constitutional free-speech rights have undermined the federal government’s case against former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, his lawyers argued in court filings Monday.
McDonnell’s lawyers said last month’s McCutcheon v. FEC decision, which voided the overall federal limit on individuals’ campaign contributions, and the landmark 2010 Citizens United that lifted restrictions on independent political spending show the high court’s definition of political corruption is significantly narrower than how federal prosecutors define it.
“The government’s broad construction would directly infringe core First Amendment freedoms,” the lawyers wrote.
