Colorado Campaign-Giving Ban Likely To Trigger Legal Skirmish
This is a discussion on Colorado Campaign-Giving Ban Likely To Trigger Legal Skirmish within the Law News forum, part of the FORUM INFORMATION category; The woeful predictions that Election Day would leave behind a legacy of legal fights in state after state didn’t really ...
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
News
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,438
|
![]() The woeful predictions that Election Day would leave behind a legacy of legal fights in state after state didn’t really materialize. Lawyers were primed, only to find that things went smoother than expected in most places. But there have been some surprises. Advocates of gay marriage were caught off guard when seemingly left-leaning California decided marriage was solely for a man and a woman. Court challenges to the constitutional amendment began the very next day (Find previous coverage here and here and here.) And in Minnesota, Al Franken, the comedian-turned-Democratic-pol who’s locked in a tight race for the Senate with the non-comedian incumbent Republican Norm Coleman, is suing to access data on voters who had their absentee ballots rejected, as an already nasty race turns nastier. Here’s the AP story. And there’s more: In Colorado, a legal fight is looming over a narrowly passed ballot initiative that prohibits numerous voters from contributing to campaigns. Amendment 54, as explained in this WSJ story, bans campaign contributions from entities holding large no-bid government contracts. The prohibition extends to the entity’s officers, directors and trustees, and to those individuals’ relatives. Lawyers advising the unusual coalition of big labor, big business and non-profits angered by the ban, predict a court challenge very soon. Mark Grueskin, a Denver attorney advising some of the opponents, says the ban has severe First Amendment problems and would be very difficult to enforce. Says Grueskin: “There’s no way political candidates will know who they can take funds from. They’ll have to do a retinal scan on contributors if this amendment takes effect.” It’s scheduled to do just that at the end of the year. However, Dennis Polhill, a senior fellow with the Independence Institute, a free-market think tank, defends the ban on contributions by relatives as necessary to clean up government. “The reason for that is obvious,” he said in an interview with the WSJ’s Stephanie Simon. “So no one can play games with the money.” |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmark & Share |
«
An Officer and a Gentlemans David Keith Sues Over Film Project
|
How I Made Partner at . . . Skadden: Make Yourself Heard.
»
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Gay legal groups and federal lawsuit challenging California's same-sex marriage ban | forum_admin | Law News | 0 | Jul 11th, 2009 06:31 PM |
| Gov. Corzine joins legal fight to overturn federal ban on sports betting | forum_admin | Law News | 0 | Jul 3rd, 2009 04:43 PM |
| California legal chief calls for end to gay marriage ban (AFP) | Yahoo!_news | Crimes and Trials News | 0 | Mar 3rd, 2009 11:20 PM |
| No contract, giving 30 day notice mid month, Colorado | Unregistered | Landlord vs Tenant Issues | 5 | Jan 14th, 2009 08:38 AM |
| Looking for Legal advice for Landlord-Colorado | co3023C | Landlord vs Tenant Issues | 1 | Jul 14th, 2007 10:36 AM |
Forming an off-shore company? We can assist you in forming your company in 40 countries worldwide.
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:33 AM.









Linear Mode

