Here is an article briefly describing the U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Davis v Federal Election Commission. The article says both sides had holes poked in their arguments, and says it is very difficult to predict which way this case will go. Check back here later in the day for a link to the transcript.

UPDATE: Here is a somewhat more comprehensive AP story. SECOND UPDATE: see here for Election Law Professor Rick Hasen’s analysis of the oral argument. His blog also has a link to the transcript.

The case challenges part of the McCain-Feingold law. That part of the law relaxes contribution limits when one of the candidates for Congress spends more than $350,000 on his or her own campaign. Davis argues that since the government had earlier insisted that strict contribution limits are necessary to prevent corruption or the appearance of corruption, the whole rationale for relaxing contribution limits in certain situations doesn’t make sense.

On April 21, the California Senate Appropriations Committee passed SB 1322, which removes certain laws that discriminate against Communist Party members. The bill is not an election law bill. But if it passes, it should be possible to also repeal certain California laws that discriminate against Communist Party members in the election code and in the state Constitution. California is one of only six states that have such provisions in its election laws.

Earlier this month, Alabama Representative Cam Ward introduced HB 738, which cuts the number of signatures for an independent (for office other than president) from 3% of the last gubernatorial vote, to 1.5%. Representative Ward spoke to the Alabama Libertarian state convention on April 19, and said he intended his bill to reduce the 3% petition requirement for minor parties as well, and that he will amend his own bill to also reduce the new party petition.