In the News
National Review: Rand Paul Does Respect the Constitution
By Bradley A. Smith
It is true that the Supreme Court has held, in Richardson v. Ramirez, that states may disenfranchise felons. In recognition of that decision, and the principles of federalism, Senator Paul proposes only to set standards for federal elections — that is, Congress and the presidency — and not state elections. The authority for Congress to set voting standards in federal elections arguably comes from Article I, Section 4, of the Constitution, which provides that “the Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.”
Roger argues that this congressional power does not extend to determining who is eligible to vote, as opposed to how, where, and when voting should take place. This is certainly a reasonable argument, buttressed by language in the Supreme Court’s decision last term in Arizona v. Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona, a case dealing with Arizona’s request for a waiver from certain federal registration requirements under the Help America Vote Act. In Inter-Tribal, the court wrote, “Arizona is correct that the Elections Clause empowers Congress to regulate how federal elections are held, but not who may vote in them.”
Case closed? Not quite. Inter-Tribal notwithstanding, the Supreme Court has never overruled Oregon v. Mitchell, a 1970 case in which the Court upheld Congress’s power to legislatively overrule state laws and grant the right to vote in federal elections to 18 to 21 year olds (Not long after, the Constitution was specifically amended to grant the vote to 18 year olds.) But Mitchell is a fractured decision, with no single theory uniting the five-justice majority.
IRS
Cincinnati Enquirer: 17 lawyers argue over IRS suit
By Amber Hunt
The lawsuit was filed last year after allegations surfaced that IRS employees in Cincinnati improperly flagged and held up applications for tax-exempt status by tea party-affiliated groups. The suit states that the IRS and its agents “singled out groups … for intensive and intrusive scrutiny, probing their members’ associates, speech, activities, and beliefs.”
The tea party groups and their members suffered years of delay and expense, the suit alleges. “The result was a muffling and muzzling of free expression,” it states.
Twelve of the 17 lawyers on Monday represent defendants who are asking that the case be dismissed. They argue that the U.S. has not waived its sovereign immunity for the plaintiff organizations and that the tea party groups lack standing to raise the claims.
AZ Central (LTE): Let’s label Lerner guilty, just like IRS does to us
By Jim Avery
A number of years ago, when I lived in Florida, I had a loss when my home was flooded by Hurricane Ivan. Part of the flooded contents of our home were all of our files, including tax records.
When I filed my taxes, I was targeted for an audit due to my casualty loss. When I told the wonderful agent at the IRS that all my records (along with most other possessions) had been lost in the hurricane, the sympathetic, caring agent opened up three years for audit. They then computed what they thought I should owe for the three years and demanded payment. As my records were destroyed, I had no way to fight them.
The IRS’ officials rules are that they are right unless I can prove different. In other words, guilty until proven innocent. Why, then, cannot former IRS administrator Lois Lerner be held to the same standards? Guilty until the IRS provides the proof of innocence.
SCOTUS/Judiciary
Tribune-Star: Advancing the cause
By Mark Bennett
Bopp got the last laugh in that 2002 case, too. In addition to his family members, five Supreme Court justices favored his argument — a 5-4 “landmark” decision, as he puts it. In the 12 years since, the now white-haired, bespectacled 66-year-old has become a familiar face in that courtroom. He’s won nine of 13 cases — decided on their merits — in the U.S. Supreme Court. Several of those victories also carry that “landmark” label. Bopp has crisscrossed the nation for more than 30 years, working on more than 150 cases in state and federal courts, knocking down laws he believes inhibit the expression of free speech in political campaigns by citizens, candidates, issue-advocacy groups and, yes, corporations.
“In the often arcane world of campaign finance law, he’s a veritable rock star,” said Dave Levinthal, who investigates the influence of money in politics for the Center for Public Integrity in Washington.
Outside that realm, among folks who aren’t political junkies and haven’t seen Bopp on the cover of the American Bar Association Journal, his exploits are less known. Even in his hometown. “People don’t know I do these things,” Bopp said with a slight grin.
Candidates, Politicians, Campaigns, and Parties
The Clarion-Ledger: Mayfield family plans lawsuit, charges against Madison
By Geoff Pender and Emily Le Coz
Mayfield was a respected attorney, state Republican and tea party leader, husband and father of two sons. Friends, family and his attorneys have said his arrest was politically motivated and his treatment by Madison authorities – including his bond being set at $250,000 — was overboard.
Reeves, said: “I’ve been an attorney for 32 years, and they don’t set drug dealers’ bonds that high.”
Reeves said Mayfield’s “life crashed” after his arrest.
“He was so shocked at being accused of something he didn’t do, and Cochran used his arrest photo in a political ad … Mark was a transactional lawyer – loan closings, title work – for three banks in the Jackson area. On the day his picture was in the paper, all three banks called him and said, ‘Mark, you’re fired.’ That devastated him. He lost his business. He had to let his secretaries go.”
Roll Call: Candidates Rush to Collect Funds by June 30th Deadline
By Kent Cooper
The 2014 U.S. Senate and House campaigns are rushing to collect contributions prior to the June 30th close of their financial books.
Federal candidates and their campaign committees must close their financial books on Monday, June 30th, and publicly disclose their receipts, disbursements, cash and debt balances later in July.
Lobbying and Ethics
The Hill: Rangel wrangled in potential ethics probe?
By Tim Devaney
Potential ethics violations involving Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) threaten to steal his spotlight after a hard-fought primary win earlier in the week.
Rangel failed to report an all-expense paid trip to China last August with nine other lawmakers from the Congressional Black Caucus, the National Journal reported.
The 84-year-old New York Democrat was the only lawmaker who failed to report the trip, a violation of House rules.
FEC
The Wichita Eagle: FEC dismisses Operation Rescue’s complaint against Trust Women’s PAC
By Deb Gruver
The Federal Election Commission has dismissed Operation Rescue’s complaint against the political action committee of the Trust Women Foundation, the group that re-opened the former clinic of slain Wichita doctor George Tiller.
Operation Rescue alleged that money from Trust Women’s PAC wrongly helped fund South Wind Women’s Center.
A news release from Trust Women said the group has disbanded the PAC “due to an interest in pursuing other avenues of advocacy at this time including providing direct health care services at South Wind Women’s Center and working to increase access to reproductive health care in the Midwest and South through Trust Women Foundation.”
State and Local
Utah – Salt Lake Tribune: Utah group files federal election complaint against Senator Lee
By Lee Davidson
As promised, the Alliance for a Better Utah filed a federal election complaint Wednesday against Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, and some of his donors.
The group’s complaint to the Federal Election Commission said investigations into Swallow showed that Johnson, at Swallow’s request, gave $50,000 to a variety of people and asked them to contribute it to Lee, which violates federal law.
Delaware – Delaware Online: Campaign-finance bills go to governor
By Jon Offredo
Several bills reforming Delaware’s campaign-finance law await Gov. Jack Markell’s signature, although the measures are considered by some to be weaker than those offered by Republicans.
“I think its more of a campaign finance façade,” said Senate Minority Whip Greg Lavelle, a Sharpley Republican.
The bills, offering whistle-blower protections and increased transparency on limited liability contributions, were among some of the recommendations included in former Delaware Supreme Court Chief Justice Norman E. Veasey’s report.
Kentucky – AP: Race Track Gives Donation To Political Group
Churchill Downs has donated $100,000 to a new political action committee working to elect conservatives to the Kentucky legislature.
Democratic House Speaker Greg Stumbo says the contribution could come back to haunt Churchill. The company has been seeking legislation for years that would allow casino-style gambling in Kentucky. Stumbo says Democrats have been most supportive of Churchill’s efforts to build a casino in Louisville and that the contribution will make it extremely difficult for the House to move forward on the expanded gambling issue.
Ohio –– Cleveland.com: Ben Suarez found not guilty of violating campaign finance laws
By Jen Steer
North Canton businessman Ben Suarez was found not guilty of violating campaign finance laws.
Suarez, 72, faced eight counts, including violating campaign finance laws and obstructing justice. Suarez was found guilty on one count, witness tampering, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years. Sentencing is set for Oct. 7.
Suarez’s company and co-defendant in the case, Suarez Corporation Industries, was found not guilty on all counts.
