On January 19, 2012, the 9th circuit issued an opinion in Farris v Seabrook, 11-35620, a case over Washington State’s $800 limit on contributions to political committees making expenditures in a recall campaign. The 9th circuit agreed with the U.S. District Court that the law should be enjoined. The 9th circuit wrote that there “is only a tenuous relationship with candidates.” Recalls in Washington, as in most states, simply put on the ballot the question of whether a particular office-holder should be recalled. They do not simultaneously bring about an election campaign over who should fill the vacant seat. Just as no one can bribe an initiative, neither can anyone bribe a recall.
On the other hand, on February 17, a Texas State Court of Appeals blocked a recall from going ahead, even though the recall drive had enough valid signatures, because an incorporated church had sponsored the recall petition. Cook v Tom Brown Ministries, 08-11-367-cv. Here is the 27-page opinion, which does not discuss the constitutionality of Texas’ law forbidding corporate contributions to a recall committee, except to say that Citizens United v FEC does not invalidate the Texas restriction. The Texas decision does not mention Farris v Seabrook or any other precedents over whether contributions to a recall committee may be limited.