Summary: Cases Discussed Newberry v. United States (1921) (Congress lacks power to regulate primaries where electors are free to ignore results of the party's primary) United States v. Classic (1941) (Congress may regulate primaries where electors are bound by their results) United States v. CIO (1948) (union may endorse candidate in its weekly periodical where it does not spend money outside its regular expenditures for publication) United States v. Automobile Workers(1957) (a union regular periodical is not an independent expenditure) Mills v. Alabama (1966) (newspapers can publish editorials endorsing candidates) Miami Herald v. Tornillo (1974) (newspapers do not have to provide space for a response when they criticize a candidate) Buckley v. Valeo (1976) (contribution limits are constitutional) (independent expenditure limits applied to individuals are unconstitutional) (limits on how much candidate and immediate family can spend on own campaign are unconstitutional) (ceilings on overall campaign expenditures are unconstitutional) (disclosure rules are constitutional) (voluntary public financing scheme is constitutional) First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti (1978) (corporate contribution and expenditure ban in context of a referendum submitted to voters is unconstitutional) Citizens Against Rent Control v. City of Berkeley (1981) (contribution limit of $250 to support or oppose ballot initiatives unconstitutional) FEC v. National Right To Work (1982) (requirement that PACs may only receive contributions from their employees, stockholders or members is constitutional) FEC v. National Conservative Political Action Committee (1985) (independent expenditure limit applied to PACs in context of voluntary public financing system unconstitutional) FEC v. Massachusetts Citizens for Life (1986) (independent expenditure ban applied to a nonprofit issue advocacy corporation unconstitutional) Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce (1990) (independent expenditure ban applied to non-profit with both political and nonpolitical purposes is constitutional) (OVERRULED) Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee v. FEC (1996) (independent expenditure limit applied to parties not coordinating with candidates is unconstitutioanl) Colorado II (2001) (independent expenditure limit applied to parties coordinating with candidates is constitutional) FEC v. Beaumont (2003) (ban on direct contributions by non-profit issue advocacy corporation is constitutional) McConnell v. FEC (2003) (prohibiting parties from raising and spending soft money is constitutional) (preventing issue ads within 30 days of primary and 60 days of general election is constitutional (OVERRULED)) Randall v. Sorrell (2006) (Vernmont contributions were unconstitutionally low) FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life (2007) (electioneering communication limited to magic words (made obsolete by Citizens United)) Davis v. FEC (2009) (Millionaires Amendment which increased contribution limits that opposing candidates for the House of Representatives could receive when a self-financed House candidate spent more than $350,000 of his own money is unconstitutional) Citizens United v. FEC (2009) (independent expenditure ban in BCRA unconstitutional) (disclosure and reporting requirements even as to independent expenditures are constitutional) Nevada Commission on Ethics v. Carrigan (2011) (conflict of interest law disallowing votes on legislation is constitutional) Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club Pac v. Bennett (2011) (Arizona public financing system giving dollar for dollar benefits to candidates whose privately funded opponents spend more than the public finance limits is unconstitutional)
