Supreme Court strikes down individual aggregate contribution limits
By William H Minor
The US Supreme Court has struck down a long-standing campaign finance provision that limited the total amount that individuals may contribute to federal political candidates and committees. The decision, in the case McCutcheon et al v Federal Election Commission, was handed down on 2 April 2014. It is the most significant campaign finance case since the Citizens United decision in 2010.
In a five-to-four decision, the court reasoned in McCutcheon that the aggregate limits do not further a legitimate government interest and that the First Amendment protects the ability of an individual to contribute to as many candidates and committees as the individual wishes.
The aggregate limits at debate in the case established a maximum cap that an individual may give to all federal candidates and committees over a two-year election cycle. For 2013-14, the figure was set at $123,200 (£73,400). Within that total, an individual could give no more than $48,600 to candidates for federal office, with the remainder of the limit available for contributions to federal party committees and federal political action committees…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the DLA Piper briefing.
News from DLA Piper
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from DLA Piper
Social media is an ever-increasing area of litigation. Facebook users spend more than 10.5 billion minutes per day on the website, for example.
The OIG Compendium provides a summary of opportunities to ‘achieve cost savings, improve programme management and ensure quality of care and safety of beneficiaries.’
Analysis from The Lawyer
Regulators are ramping up the pressure in the aftermath of recession, leaving firms to compete for compliance and restructuring work
Shearman & Sterling is making its presence felt in the City, squaring up to magic circle firms and looking to muscle in on key relationships. Private equity house Bridgepoint is one outfit that has had its head turned by the US firm.