Forbes has this essay by Paul Sherman, on whether the U.S. Supreme Court will hear Worley v Detzner, 13-333. The case is on the Court’s conference on November 1. The case was brought by four individuals who each wanted to chip in $150 for radio ads against a statewide ballot initiative. Since their total spending would have exceeded $500, Florida law required them to file elaborate campaign finance documents, not only once, but periodically. They argue that requiring such reports for so small amount violates the free speech provision of the First Amendment. Thanks to HowAppealing for the link.
Ballot Access News
Edited By Richard Winger
Can 5 of 9 SCOTUS genius folks find ANY dollar amount in the 1st Amdt ???
NON-morons can look at the book –
Sources of Our Liberties, edited by Richard L. Perry (1959) — just before SCOTUS went leftwing N-U-T-S in the 1960s.
Sources of USA Amdts 1 to 8 — i.e. lots of EVIL old rotted Brit monarchy / oligarchy stuff.
The case seems almost contrived.
The Florida law for qualification of a minor party requires the same financial reporting. That law also requires a minimum level of activity – where that activity is defined by the Secretary of State in regulation. The SOS has defined the minimum level of activity to be $500 of receipts or expenditures per year.
If the plaintiffs won their case, it would be reasonable to up the $$$ amount for political parties. That is, if $500 is such a minimal amount that it is almost casual, can it be considered sufficient activity for a political party that has ballot access?