On October 24, the U.S. Court of Appeals, 2nd circuit, enjoined a New York state law that doesn’t permit anyone to contribute more than $150,000 to a committee that is making independent expenditures for or against a candidate. An individual wanted to contribute $200,000 to a group that intends to make independent expenditures on behalf of the Republican candidate for Mayor of New York city, Joseph Lhota.

The case is New York Progress and Protection PAC v Walsh, 13-3889. The three judges who signed the order are Jacob Dennis (a Bush Sr. appointee), Raymond Lohier (an Obama appointee), and John Koeltl (a Clinton appointee). Here is the order. The U.S. District Court had refused to enjoin the law, saying it isn’t good policy to change the rules so close to an election. Thanks to Rick Hasen and Thomas Jones for the link.

U.S. District Court Judge William Haynes will hear Tomasik v Goins, 3:13cv-1118, on October 31 at 3:30 p.m. in Nashville, Tennessee. This is the Libertarian Party’s lawsuit to get on the ballot for the upcoming special legislative election in Memphis in December. The candidate, James Tomasik, will definitely be on the ballot, because he was able to complete the independent candidate petition, which only requires 25 signatures. The issue is whether he should have the label “Libertarian” on the ballot next to his name.

The Libertarian Party has never been a ballot-qualified party in Tennessee, but the law on how newly-qualifying parties get on the ballot was struck down on June 17, 2013. The state is appealing that decision to the Sixth Circuit. The new Libertarian case, which was filed on October 9, 2013, is especially strong because Tennessee doesn’t actually have any statutory procedure for a party to get on the ballot in a special election. Once the special election is announced, it is already too late for a newly-qualifying party to get on the ballot.

On October 23, the plaintiff who had challenged Columbus (Ohio) State Community College’s rules for free speech activity on campus settled his lawsuit. The college, which formerly only permitted leafleting, petitioning, and other First Amendment activity at two tiny areas amounting to less than 1% of the campus, has agreed to change its rules and permit this activity on most outdoor areas of the campus. Here is the settlement agreement. The case had been Anderson v Harrison, 2:13cv838, s.d. Here is a story about the settlement. Thanks to Alliance Alert for the link.