U.S. Supreme Court Campaign Finance Decision Expected Monday, June 29

June 29 is the last day that the U.S. Supreme Court sits, before its summer break. Only one election law decision still hasn’t been released. It is virtually certain that that decision will be released on June 29. The case is Citizens United v Federal Election Commission, 08-205. It concerns a challenge to the federal campaign finance laws by a corporation that made “Hillary, the Movie”, and expected to show it in movie theaters during the early months of 2008. The FEC said that the filmmakers had to disclose the names of people who contributed to advertising for the movie. The FEC also said the ads had to carry the name of the person responsible for the content of this advertising (for at least 4 seconds) and that the ad also include the name, address and phone number or web address of the organization behind the ad.

The lower court, a 3-judge U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., had refused to issue an injunction against the FEC rules. For an account of the oral argument in the U.S. Supreme Court on March 24, 2009, see this description by Dahlia Lithwick at Slate.

Democrats Again Ponder Changes to Presidential Nominations Rules

A commission of the national Democratic Party is meeting June 26-27 to consider changes to the national rules for nominating a president. See this story. Thanks to Politicalwire for the link. UPDATE: According to this article in The Hill, the first meeting is not expected to make any news; the group is mostly getting familiar with the history of past efforts to change the nature of the Democratic nominations process. For more information, see www.demconwatchblog.com. For a list of the 37 members of the Commission, see here. Thanks to Thomas Jones for the link to the membership. One odd aspect of the membership list is that although it has 37 members, it has no members from Texas, the nation’s 2nd most populous state.

Illinois Bill, Making it More Difficult for Qualified Parties to Nominate, Goes to Governor

On June 26, the Illinois legislature finally sent HB 723 to Governor Pat Quinn. HB 723 had passed a month earlier. It makes it more difficult for qualified parties to nominate candidates after the primary is over, in cases in which no one had been nominated by that party at its primary. The Green Party, which is a qualified party in Illinois, hopes to persuade the Governor to veto the bill. Already, half of state legislative races in Illinois typically only have one person on the November ballot, and the bill will make this situation even worse.

California Bill Outlawing Paying Petitioners per Signature Passes Senate

On May 14, the California Senate passed SB 34 by a vote of 22-14. It makes it illegal to pay an initiative petition circulator on a per-signature basis, either directly or indirectly. This means that circulators could not even be given a bonus for high production. The bill will be heard in the Assembly Elections Committee on July 7.

The bill does not apply to petitions for independent candidates, new parties, recalls, or petitions in lieu of filing fee. A similar law was held unconstitutional in Ohio by the 6th circuit in 2008, and when Ohio asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear its appeal, the Court declined.

Connecticut Governor Signs Bill for Special Elections for U.S. Senate

On June 26, Connecticut Governor M. Jodi Rell signed SB 913. It provides that when a vacancy occurs in a U.S. Senate seat, the vacancy should be filled with a special election (unless the vacancy is quite close in time to a regularly-scheduled election). Depending on the timing of the vacancy, there might or might not be primaries. If there were no time for a primary, qualified major parties would nominate by convention.

In most states, and in Connecticut until now, vacancies in U.S. Senate seats are filled by the Governor, although the appointee only serves until the next regularly-scheduled congressional election.