8th Circuit To Re-hear Challenge to Minnesota’s Ban On Corporate Contributions, IEsJames Madison Center for Free Speech PRESS RELEASE 8th Circuit To Re-hear Challenge to Minnesota’s Ban On Corporate Contributions, IEs Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life is an association of citizens that wants to support candidates who agree with the pro-life position. And The Taxpayers League of Minnesota is an association of citizens that wants to support candidates that favor limited taxes. Both groups want to make general-fund contributions to their chosen candidates. They also want to make general-fund independent expenditures to fund political advertisements in support of their chosen candidates. But Minnesota law forbids them from doing any of this, even though the Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment protects corporate political speech, just like it protects human political speech. Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life and the Taxpayers League of Minnesota filed suit in federal court challenging these bans on their political speech. But the court ruled that the bans were likely constitutional. The corporations then appealed to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, but on May 16 a three-judge panel agreed with the district court and ruled that these prohibitions are likely constitutional. The corporations then asked all 15 Judges of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to set aside the three-judge panel decision and re-hear their case. A majority of the Judges agreed with the corporations that the case should be reheard. The Eighth Circuit Court therefore vacated the three-judge decision upholding the statutes. The State of Minnesota asked the Eighth Circuit to reinstate the part of the panel decision that upheld the ban on corporate contributions to candidates. Today the Eighth Circuit Court ruled that the full opinion is vacated and it will consider the constitutionality of the corporate contribution ban as well as the constitutionality of the ban on corporate general-fund independent expenditures. James Bopp, Jr., lead attorney for the corporations, explained that “the Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United that it is unconstitutional to ban corporations from making independent expenditures, or to require them to submit to the PAC-like burdens Minnesota requires. The Supreme Court also said in Citizens United that corporate speech must be protected just like human speech, and the government cannot discriminate against speakers just because they are corporations. That reasoning requires a ruling that prohibitions on corporate contributions are unconstitutional, since the Supreme Court has said that bans on human contributions are unconstitutional. I am glad the appeals court is going to reconsider its ruling upholding them.” Oral argument on the rehearing en banc is scheduled for September 21 in St. Louis. The case is known as MCCL v. Swanson. The Petition for Rehearing En Banc is availably at http://www.jamesmadisoncenter.org/cases/files/2010/07/MCCL.20110531.Appellee-Pet-Rehg-En-Banc.pdf. The Court’s order vacating the panel’s decision is available at http://www.jamesmadisoncenter.org/cases/files/2010/07/ORDER-granting-petition-for-rehearing.pdf. James Bopp, Jr. has a national federal and state election law practice. He is an attorney with Bopp, Coleson & Bostrom and General Counsel for the James Madison Center for Free Speech. He is also a former Co-Chairman of the Election Law Subcommittee of the Federalist Society. |