California ProLife Council PAC v. Scully
California ProLife Council PAC v. Scully
Campaign Finance Reform
In 1996, California voters passed Proposition 208, imposing contribution limits and restrictions on candidates for state and local elected offices. When the initiative was challenged, proponents of Proposition 208 retained the Brennan Center and Munger, Tolles & Olson to defend the campaign finance reform measure against five separate lawsuits that were ultimately consolidated. Legl issues in this 1998 case included: validity of fundraising time limits, aggregate contribution limits from certain groups, low contribution limits, and higher contribution limits for candidates who accept expenditure caps. After the district court preliminarily enjoined the initiative, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Nixon v. Shrink Missouri Government PAC. Fearing that Proposition 208 would ultimately be upheld under Shrink Missouri, the California Legislature put Proposition 34 on the ballot, which contained far less stringent contribution limits. Proposition 34 passed in 2000, thereby mooting the case. See California Pro-Life Council PAC v. Scully 328 F.3d 1088 (9th Cir. 2003).
Proposition 208
Proposition 34
Contributions to Local Candidates
$100 Unlimited
Contributions to Legislative Candidates $250
$3,000
Contributions to Gubernatorial Candidates
$500
$20,000
Other State Seats
$500
$500
