Freedom of Speech & Expression
NEIL RANDALL, et al. v. WILLIAM H. SORRELL et al., 548 U.S. 230 (2006)
- Argued:
- February 28, 2006
- Decided:
- June 26, 2006
- Decided by:
- Roberts Court, 2005
- Legal Principle at Issue:
- Whether Vermont's mandatory limits on candidate expenditures violate the 1st and 14th Amendments and the Supreme Court's decision in Buckley v. Valeo? Whether Vermont's treatment of independent expenditures by political parties and committees presumptively coordinated if they benefit fewer than six candidates, and thereby subject to strict contribution and expenditure limits, is consistent with the 1st and 14th Amendments and the Supreme Court's decision in Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee v. FEC? Whether Vermont's contribution limits, which are the lowest in the country, which allow only a single maximum contribution over a two-year election cycle, and which prohibit state political parties from contributing more than $400 to their gubernatorial candidate, fall below an acceptable constitutional threshold and should be struck down?
- Action:
- Reversed and remanded. Petitioning party received a favorable disposition.
Advocates for Respondent
Advocates for Petitioner
Concurring Opinion
Dissenting Opinion
Coming soon!
Resources:
Coming soon!
Commentary:
Coming soon!
Topics: Campaign Finance, Freedom of Speech & Expression, Political and Electoral Process
Cite this page: APA Bluebook Chicago MLA
This library is a work in progress. See an error on this page? Let us know.
