Judge: FEC Can Regulate Case-By-Case

AP via SFGate ^ | 8/30/7 | JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer

[SmithL]

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Federal Election Commission can continue to regulate independent political groups on a case-by-case basis and does not need to adopt new rules to govern them, a federal judge said Thursday.

The decision was a blow to advocates of more restrictive campaign finance laws, who say the lack of precise rules will result in widespread abuses of campaign spending in the 2008 presidential and congressional elections.

FEC lawyers argued that election commissioners were adequately policing the activities of so-called 527 groups, named after the section of the IRS code under which they are registered. These groups, which can raise money outside of federal limits, have become very influential in congressional and presidential elections.

The decision came one day after the FEC announced a settlement with a Democratic-leaning group that agreed to pay $775,000 for violating campaign finance laws in 2004.

"The Court recognizes that the FEC has successfully brought enforcement actions against 527 groups (over the past year), which demonstrates that the case-by-case approach can be at least somewhat effective," U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan wrote.

[SmithL]

Sullivan, Emmet G.

Born 1947 in Washington, DC

Federal Judicial Service:
Judge, U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Nominated by William J. Clinton on March 22, 1994, to a seat vacated by Louis F. Oberdorfer; Confirmed by the Senate on June 15, 1994, and received commission on June 16, 1994.

Education:
Howard University, B.A., 1968

Howard University School of Law, J.D., 1971

Professional Career:
Law clerk, Neighborhood Legal Services Program, Washington, DC, 1971-1972
Law clerk, Hon. James Washington, Superior Court of the District of Columbia, 1972-1973
Private practice, Washington, DC, 1974-1984
Associate judge, Superior Court of the District of Columbia, 1984-1992
Associate judge, District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1992-1994

Race or Ethnicity: African American

Gender: Male

[Still Thinking]

The decision was a blow to advocates of more restrictive campaign finance laws, who say the lack of precise rules will result in widespread abuses of campaign spending in the 2008 presidential and congressional elections.

And Still Thinking says case-by-case regulation means the leftist Marxist ones will be able to do anything they want and skate, while the GOA and any conservative ones will spend mega-man-hours submitting forms, responding to requests for clarification, and being harried and intimidated into not having their say, and being threatened with having tax exemptions revoked.

[sergeantdave]

The Federal Election Commission can continue to regulate independent political groups on a case-by-case basis and does not need to adopt new rules to govern them, a federal judge said Thursday.

Well, what could possibly be wrong with this sentence?

Let’s see....

A federal judge says the FEC need not “adopt new rules.”

Where does it say that unelected bureaucrats can write any law?

I thought that was the job of legislators elected by the people,

Oh, legislators elected by the people who write law are not needed anymore?

How utterly quaint and oh so 1930’s European totalitarian.

So the judge is saying it’s okay for unelected soviets and fascist functionairies to write law?

That’s nice. Should we peons fly the soviet hammer and sickle or the German swastika?

Maybe the idiot judge will rule on it.

[supercat]

A federal judge says the FEC need not “adopt new rules.”

Is the effect of this that there are no new rules, or that new rules will exist but be double-top-secret so that nobody can know how to follow them?

[Chode]

thank you...

[NormsRevenge]

Selective enforcement,, what a novel idea.

Behold and beware of a gubamint apparatus beholden to no one including the citizens whose best interests it supposedly is intended to protect.

[Condor51]

The decision came one day after the FEC announced a settlement with a Democratic-leaning group that agreed to pay $775,000 for violating campaign finance laws in 2004.

Yep that's all over the news - Fox, CNN, PMSNBC, etc. The MSM is really on that story. The New York Times even had it on page one above the fold.

Oh wait ... my bad. All I see and hear is stuff about some senator's toilet behavior. Never mind....

/s