Today, our firm filed an amicus brief opposing an effort to remove President Trump from the primary ballot in Colorado. The challengers claim that Trump engaged in “insurrection” and thus is ineligible to be President under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Colorado Supreme Court agreed, in a 4-3 decision. Our amicus brief urged the U.S. Supreme Court to decide only the
Today, our firm filed an amicus brief on behalf of Citizens United in an appeal challenging the Biden Administration’s withholding of agency reports in violation of the Freedom of Information Act. President Biden issued Executive Order 14019 on March 6, 2021, directing every executive branch agency to provide a report to the White House on ways
Today, David Hardy of Tucson, Arizona, filed an amicus brief, that our firm prepared with him, in support of Kari Lake’s Petition for Review in the Arizona Supreme Court. Our amicus brief argued that the Lake only needed to prove her case by a preponderance of the evidence, not by the clear and convincing standard applied by the courts below. Furthermore,
Today, our firm filed an amicus brief for America’s Future in the U.S. Supreme Court which is considering whether state courts may usurp the constitutional role of state legislatures to set the “Times, Places and Manner” for holding Congressional elections under Article I, Sec. 4, cl. 1. Our brief answered that question in the negative, arguing that the U.S. Constitution assigns
In this article, John Crump explained the story of the FEC’s denial of the complaint our firm filed for him and Gun Owners of America. That complaint asked the FEC to act against Facebook for its suppression of the anti-gun record of Kamala Harris during the 2020 campaign.
Today we filed an amicus brief on behalf of Citizens United, Citizens United Foundation, and The Presidential Coalition, LLC in support of Texas’ attempt to restore constitutional order to the selection of Presidential Electors. We explain how Texas and other states were harmed by Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin when they allowed the circumvention of election procedures adopted by their state legislatures.
Today, we filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in support of Texas’ original action against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin challenging their certification of Presidential Electors.
This brief was filed for U.S. Congressman Mike Johnson and a group of 126 Members of the U.S. House of Representatives. In this brief, these Members of the federal legislature seek to protect the constitutional powers of state legislatures to determine the manner of appointing Presidential Electors.
The Washington Times published an op ed written by Bill Olson and Pat McSweeney demonstrating the plenary authority of state legislatures to appoint electors. The piece explains that state certifications of votes are no impediment to a state legislatures power. And, legislatures may act without the call of the Governor. It is entitled “State legislatures have absolute authority to select electors.”
Today we filed an amicus brief in support of a petition for certiorari filed by the Republican Party of Pennsylvania seeking to challenge the decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court changing Pennsylvania election law at the last minute before the November elections. We explained that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court usurped the authority of the Pennsylvania state legislature to make these decisions with respect to federal elections, subject only to Congressional action. We urge the Supreme Court to take the case to invalidate any ballots received after election day.
Today, Bill Olson and Virginia attorney Pat McSweeney released a paper they co-authored entitled “The Constitutional Duty of State Legislatures in a Contested Presidential Election.” The paper discusses in depth the provisions of the U.S. Constitution which vest total responsibility and power on state legislatures to select electors. This power includes the duty to ensure the integrity of a Presidential election, particularly when there is demonstrated fraud, corruption and foreign intrigue. The Western Journal published that article here: Link to article
Today we sent a letter, transmitting copies of our October 6, 2020 complaint and exhibits that had been filed with the Federal Election Commission, to DNI Director John Ratcliffe and FBI Director Christopher Wray. This submission was made pursuant to a request of Director Wray made at a Press Conference seeking information about foreign intervention in federal elections on October 21, 2020.
Today we filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission detailing violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act committed by Facebook, AFP Fact Check, and possibly Kamala Harris for Vice President. The complaint is based on multiple acts of suppression of information about the anti-gun views of Vice Presidential Candidate Kamala Harris by Facebook, pursuant to decisions made by a French
Today we filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court supporting a petition for certiorari designed to challenge a 2015 Montana State election law. The law regulated “electioneering communications” — borrowing a term which Congress had employed in the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 to require reporting of a narrow category of broadcast advertisements
Today our firm filed an amicus brief opposing a strained reading of the Federal Election Campaign Act disclosure requirement which CREW has urged a federal court to be forced on the FEC. FEC rules have long required the disclosure by non-political committees of donors giving to support specific Independent Expenditures (IEs). Reversing that established rule, the U.S. District Court for the District
Today we filed comments with the Federal Election Commission in response to a petition for rulemaking filed by the Institute for Free Speech on the FEC’s definition of “contribution.” Our comments supported the IFS petition and also urged the FEC to amend the definition of “expenditure” in the same rulemaking.
The comments were filed on behalf of the Free Speech
Jeremiah Morgan wrote this interesting take on why Michael Cohen would plead guilty to a non-crime. First, he explains why there is no campaign finance law violation here, and then discusses how this case provides a precedent to support the ever-increasing criminalization of politics in America.
Today we filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to review an appeal filed by the Independent Institute challenging the disclosure requirements imposed by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (“BCRA”) as applied to genuine issue ads. BCRA compels the disclosure of donors to such ads over $1,000, with substantial civil and criminal penalties for failure to report this information
We were pleased to have persuaded the FEC to act unanimously to modify a Conciliation Agreement entered into in 2005. The reason was that the state of election law had changed, based on recent court rulings, which then were followed by changes in Commission regulations.
This may be only the second or third time such a modification has been approved by the FEC. We believe that the last time it
Today our firm filed an amicus brief in the Tenth Circuit in support of the right of Kansas to require that persons registering to vote under the National Voter Registration Act of 1994 submit documentary proof of citizenship. Our brief supported the position taken by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach.
On behalf of The Viguerie Company, our firm filed an Advisory Opinion Request with the FEC, seeking clarification of a conciliation agreement entered into in December 2005. The FEC elected to treat AOR as a request to modify the Conciliation Agreement, and approved the request.
Today we filed an amicus brief in support of the Independence Institute in their challenge to the Federal Election Commission’s regulations requiring the names and addresses of donors to nonprofits doing issue ads, which technically meet the criteria of Independent Expenditures, to be disclosed. Our brief explains the motivation of Congress for wanting this information.
Today, on behalf of the Free Speech Coalition, Inc., the Free Speech Defense and Education Fund, Inc., and U.S. Justice Foundation Jeremiah Morgan of our firm testified before the Federal Election Commission at its Hearings on the McCutcheon v. FEC Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. (His testimony appears at 5:19:51 of the video.)
Today we filed comments in response to the Federal Election Commission notice in considering a petition for rulemaking. This petition asks the FEC to expand the definition of “federal office” to include a delegate to a constitutional convention for proposing amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
We explained that the FEC has no authority to expand the definition of “federal office”
Today our firm filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari seeking U.S. Supreme Court Review of two decisions of the California Courts which held that the California Secretary of State had no duty to determine whether a candidate for President of the United States is eligible to serve, if elected, before placing his name on the official state election ballot.
Our Petition explains that Article II, Section