On July 6, 2006, the Green Party of Connecticut had filed a federal lawsuit against the discriminatory public funding law passed by the Connecticut legislature in 2005. Among other things, the law requires a new party to not only collect the same number of $5 contributions from small donors as the major parties, but to also submit a petition signed by 10% of the last vote cast in that district (or in the state, if the candidate is running for statewide office). Even if the 10% petition is submitted, the new party candidate would still not receive the same amount of public funding as the major party members. For full public funding, a 20% petition is required.
On June 6, 2007, an oral argument was held, in which the state argued that the lawsuit should be summarily dismissed, even before any evidence is gathered. The judge has not ruled on the state’s motion. However, he is permitting discovery (a method of evidence-gathering) to proceed. It is unlikely that he would be permitting discovery if he intended to dismiss the lawsuit. The lawsuit is being handled by the ACLU.
How is it that oral argument was held before the case was filed?
Suggest the second date should be a later month.
Thanks for covering the GREEN PARTY!
The case was filed in July 2006. The hearing was June 2007.
volkswagen dilery zapchasti volkswagen passat oficialnyy diler volkswagen katalogi zapchastey volkswagen volkswagen mikroavtobus volkswagen otzyvy vladelcev volkswagen tehnicheskie harakteristiki test drayv volkswagen katalogi zapchastey volkswagen