February 28, 2006
Vermont’s campaign finance law in trouble? ::
legal — tagged conlaw, legal, politics, SCOTUS and vermont
2:52 pm
I should have been keeping up more with Randall v. Sorrell, the campaign finance case from Vermont that was argued before the Supreme Court today. But I haven’t. Lucky for me, SCOTUS Blog has a good summary of today’s oral argument:
The common concern among the members of the Court who spoke up appeared to be that Vermont had set its contribution levels so low that it might threaten to cut off any chance of a contender to unseat an incumbent, or that it might threaten to make a race in a competitive district a slam-dunk for the incumbent. Justice Stephen G. Breyer put the question bluntly, seeming to reflect the mood of the Court as a whole: “At what point does a limit become so low that you cuff off the possibility of a challenge?”
Given Justice Breyer’s past tendency to let campaign finance laws stand, to my mind it was significant that he asked such a pointed question. If he winds up deciding to strike down Vermont’s contributions law, then I’ll venture to speculate that the rest of the Court will follow suit. The main question for me right now will be whether he will write the opinion.
