Equal Justice Society News

On February 28, the U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in Randall v. Sorrell, No. 04-1528, on the constitutionality of campaign spending limits.

In an amicus brief filed with the court, the Equal Justice Society uses legal and social science research to illustrate that the increasing cost of campaigns recreates racial and economic disparity often to the exclusion of Americans of color. "We are urging the Court to uphold spending limits by ruling that governments have compelling interests in giving voice to all - regardless of race or income - by promoting full and meaningful participation in our political process by all members of the electorate, and that such governmental interests are sufficient to support limits on campaign spending," explained EJS President Eva Paterson.

The case stems from a comprehensive campaign finance reform law adopted by Vermont in 1997. Amidst concern that exponential increases in campaign fundraising and spending undermined public confidence in government, Vermont passed electoral reform laws that included limits on amounts candidates for state office could spend.

In 1998, the National Voting Rights Institute, founded by Equal Justice Society board member John Bonifaz, joined the state of Vermont in defending its campaign spending limits. In 2004, after years of federal court challenges to the reform law, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld the campaign spending limits finding that Vermont successfully established two compelling governmental interests justifying the spending restrictions: 1) preventing the reality and appearance of corruption, and 2) protecting the time of candidates and elected officials.

Ever since the Supreme Court decision in Buckley v. Valeo striking down congressional spending limits on First Amendment grounds, opponents of campaign finance reform have lulled many into thinking that it is unfathomable to ask the Court to balance two purportedly competing and cherished democratic liberties – political access and free speech. However, should the Court continue to equate money with speech, the 2000 case Nixon v. Shrink Missouri Government PAC reminds us that the “Constitution often permits restrictions on the speech of some in order to prevent a few from drowning out the many….”

The Equal Justice Society amicus curiae brief [PDF of the brief available for download here], filed along with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Asian American Justice Center, Latino Issues Forum, Greenlining Institute, California Women’s Agenda, Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, California Clean Money Campaign, Center for Governmental Studies, and Coalition for Economic Equity, explains that “[i]n an ideal world, men and women of perfect virtue, vision and diversity are elected to public office [to] enact laws and approve policies for the greater good unaffected by the special interests and persistent urgings of their most generous contributors.” Yet,“[t]he hard truth is that access, influence and meaningful participation [in our society] are the private reserve of those who can pay to play in this no-limit game.”

The law firm of Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk and Rabkin in San Francisco are serving as counsel to amici on a pro bono basis. Martin Glick is the counsel of record and attorneys Chandra Miller Fienen, Marla Letellier, Shannon Scott, and D’Lonra Ellis assisted him in drafting the brief.

EJS previously filed an amicus brief in an earlier campaign finance challenge, City of Albuquerque v. Homans, which addressed the constitutionality of mandatory campaign spending limits in city elections in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk and Rabkin also served as pro bono counsel in that case.

Like What We're Doing? Join, Donate to the Equal Justice Society

Your contributions make it possible for EJS to develop and support new legal theories and strategies to help ensure equal justice for all. Donations are tax deductible. To donate online to EJS, click here to go directly to the donation page.

You can also join EJS as a member:

To support a national progressive movement
To interact with progressive lawyers, judges, scholars, policy experts, students and journalists
To receive free or reduced admission to many EJS events
To receive special invitations to national conferences, regional events, local forums and panels, and CLE programs
To receive email updates on EJS events, news and programs
To help shape and develop a national, progressive voice

Click here to join or donate today!