On June 26, 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled 6-3 that Vermont’s campaign finance laws violate the U.S. Constitution. The case, Randall v Sorrell, had been brought by the state’s Republican and Libertarian Parties, the state’s Right to Life Committee, and various individuals. The lead plaintiff, Neil Randall, had been the Libertarian Party nominee elected to the state legislature in 1998 (later he left the party).

On September 5, the attorneys fees for that case were settled. Since the Equal Access to Justice Act of 1976 provides that states must pay attorneys fees, when a federal court determines that a state law violates the Bill of Rights, the state must pay the attorneys for the plaintiffs. In this case, which lasted six years and was in all three levels of federal court, the fees were very high. They amount to $1,395,000.

The U.S. Supreme Court holding in Randall v Sorrell was that states cannot limit campaign expenditures (unless the state has a system of public funding). Also, the U.S. Supreme Court in Randall v Sorrell had ruled that even contribution limits (which can be limited) can sometimes be too strict. Vermont’s limits were so low, they were invalidated. They were $400 for Governor, $300 for State Senator, and $200 for State Rep.