MITCH MCCONNELL, UNITED STATES SENATOR, et al. v. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, et al.
Supreme Court Cases
540 U.S. 93 (2003)
Legal Principle at Issue
Whether the district court erred by upholding portions of the "soft money" provision (section 101) of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), Pub. L. No. 107-155, 166 Stat. 81, because it constitutes an invalid exercise of Congress' power to regulate elections under Article I, Section 4, of the Constitution; violates the First Amendment or the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment; or is unconstitutionally vague. Whether the district court erred by upholding portions of the "electioneering communications" provisions (sections 201, 203, 204, and 311), of BCRA, because they violate the First Amendment or the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment, or are unconstitutionally vague. Whether the district court erred by holding nonjusticiable challenges to, and upholding, portions of the "advance notice" provisions, the "coordination" provisions, and the "attack ad" provision of BCRA (section 305), because they violates the First Amendment.
Affirmed and reversed (or vacated) in part. Petitioning party received a favorable disposition.
Advocated for Respondent
- Theodore B. Olson View all cases
- Paul D. Clement View all cases
- Seth P. Waxman View all cases
Advocated for Petitioner
- Kenneth Starr View all cases
- Floyd Abrams View all cases
- Laurence Gold View all cases
- Jay A. Sekulow View all cases
- Bobby R. Burchfield View all cases