Issue: (1) Whether the Federal Election Commission’s (“FEC”) alternate “expressly advocating” definition at 11 C.F.R. § 100.22(b) is unconstitutionally overbroad, void for vagueness, and contrary to law, facially and as applied to the petitioner's intended activities, because it violates the First and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, exceeds statutory authority under the Federal Election Campaign Act (“FECA”), 2 U.S.C. §§ 431 et seq., and should be declared void under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. §§ 702-06; and (2) whether FEC’s enforcement policy regulating determination of “political committee” (“PAC”) status is unconstitutionally overbroad, void for vagueness, and contrary to law, facially and as applied to the petitioner's intended activities, because it violates the First and Fifth Amendments, exceeds statutory authority under FECA, and should be declared void under APA.
On Monday at 9:30 a.m. we expect orders from the April 24 Conference. We expect one or more opinions in argued cases at 10 a.m. on Wednesday. We will be live-blogging beginning at 9:45.
This is the second week of the April sitting. On Tuesday the Court will hear oral argument in Obergefell v. Hodges, which is consolidated with three other cases, on the questions of whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires that states grant and/or recognize same-sex marriages. We will be live-blogging updates from the oral argument beginning at 11 a.m.
Glossip v. Gross The constitutionality under the Eighth Amendment of using a sedative as the first drug in a death penalty protocol.