FEC supports fast review on campaign ads
on Jan 4, 2007 at 3:26 pm
U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement, representing the Federal Election Commission, on Thursday urged the Supreme Court to hear and decide during its current Term a significant new test case on a federal ban on election-season campaign ads. In a response to a motion to expedite filed last Friday, the SG suggested that the Court move swiftly to consider the Commission’s appeal (and, presumably, a coming separate appeal by members of Congress who support the ad ban) so that the case is resolved well in advance of the 2008 election season.
The SG’s brief response can be found here. An earlier post discussing the motion can be found here.
Clement said that the FEC appeal will be filed on Jan. 12, a week from Friday, and added that it was his understanding that if Wisconsin Right to Life agrees that the case should be heard, then the Court could consider the appeal at its Jan. 19 Conference. The Solicitor General did not provide the basis of that understanding, but presumably it came from Court aides. The Wisconsin group won the case in a three-judge U.S. District Court, but took the step itself of seeking swift Supreme Court review of the coming appeals by the FEC and four members of Congress.,
The Solicitor General told the Court Thursday that the federal law’s ban on use of corporate and labor union treasury funds to pay for election-season ads that identify a specific federal candidate will not begin operating again until next Dec. 15, 30 days before the Iowa presidential caucus. Thus, he said, the Court could hear and decide the case at its next Term.
“Nevertheless,” Clement added, “both the Commission and regulated parties may benefit if the Court were to hear argument and decide this case during the current Term.” It could be processed this Term, he said, “without undue haste.” He suggested a briefing schedule that would have all briefs filed by April 18, with oral argument set for April 25 — the final day this Term that the Court is now scheduled to hold hearings. If the Court holds off on the case until February, Clement added, he would not support the rush to brief and argue the case this Term.
The Court will consider the motion to expedite at its Conference tomorrow, Jan. 5.
