McConnell v. FEC (Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act)

Brennan Center research, in particular our analyses of television advertising in the 1998 and 2000 elections (the Buying Time studies), was a key tool used in the drafting and passing of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (“BCRA”). The law closes the soft money loophole and regulates “sham issue ads.”

Once passed, BCRA was immediately challenged in court. Working with a team of law firms and nonprofit legal organizations, the Center represented Senators John McCain, Russ Feingold, Olympia Snowe, and James Jeffords, and Representatives Christopher Shays and Martin Meehan as Intervenor-Defendants in the ensuing litigation, McConnell v. FEC.

The Center focused primarily on defending the portion of the law that regulates campaign advertising by interest groups. A special three-judge panel of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia upheld portions of the law and struck down others in a decision in May 2003. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case in September 2003.

On December 10, 2003, the Supreme Court upheld all of the most important elements of BCRA .

Legislation

Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002

Statement by the President

Research and Analysis

• Buying Time 2000: Television Advertising in the 2000 Federal Elections

• Buying Time 1998

• Straight Talk on Campaign Finance Reform: 

• Paper #1: Democracy and Campaign Finance Reform 

• Paper #2: Constitutionality

• Paper #3: Political Parties

• Paper #3a: Hard Money World

• Paper #4: Voter Mobilization

• Paper #5: Magic Words

• Paper #6: Issue Advocacy By Groups

• Campaign Finance Reform: Fact & Fiction

• Top Constitutional Scholars Refute Attacks on Constitutionality of Campaign Reform

• Former ACLU Leaders Uniformly Agree on Constitutionality of McCain-Feingold

Specific Issues:

Snowe-Jeffords Amendment

• “A Narrow and Appropriate Response to Cloaked Electioneering: Measuring the Impact of the 60-Day Bright-Line Test on Issue Advocacy”

Soft Money

• The Purpose and Beneficiaries of Party “Soft Money”

• Unregulated Soft Money in Politics: Soft Money Now Comprises the Largest Share of Party Spending on Television Ads in Federal Elections

• The End of Limits on Money in Politics: Soft Money Now Comprises the Largest Share of Party Spending on Television Ads in Federal Elections

Other litigation documents in this case include the following: 

• Summary of Supreme Court Opinion

• Supreme Court Opinion

• For public District Court and Supreme Court proceedings, including the20parties’ briefs, amicus briefs, and rulings, see the Campaign Legal Center’s comprehensive library.

• Supreme Court Brief of Intervenor-Defendants (Redacted)

• District Court Panel Issues Stay of Recent Campaign Finance Ruling

• BCRA Congressional Sponsors File Supreme Court Appeal

• District Court Issues Ruling on McConnell v. FEC

• Summary of Major Rulings in District Court Decision in McConnell v. FEC

• District Court Reply Brief of Intervenor-Defendants (Redacted)

• District Court Opposition Brief of Intervenor-Defendants (Redacted)

• District Court Opening Brief of Intervenor-Defendants 

Controversy over District Court Decision & Center’s Research 

• A Compelling Case for McCain-Feingold by Al Hunt (The Wall Street Journal, May 22, 2003 – WSJ.com subscribers only)

• No Merit in Brennan Center Smear Campaign by Thomas Mann (Roll Call, May 22, 2003)

• Solid Evidence of the Need for Reform by Frederick A.O. Schwarz, Jr. (The Washington Post, May 16, 2003)

• 1,600 Pages of Confusion by George Will (The Washington Post, May 8, 2003)