Las Vegas Sun

May 5, 2024

AG joins suit on campaign spending

CARSON CITY -- Attorney General Frankie Sue Del Papa has joined with attorneys general in at least 17 other states in a suit that seeks to limit campaign spending.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 21 years ago that the government could limit contributions to candidates but to put a ceiling on candidate spending is a violation of the First Amendment on free speech.

The attorneys general filed a "Friend of the Court" brief in the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati asking for reversal of the high court's decision.

The case involves the Ohio Supreme Court, which put a limit on spending by judges who run for election in that state. A U.S. District Court, citing the U.S. Supreme Court decision, ruled that the Ohio rule was unconstitutional. The case now is before the circuit court.

Del Papa said, "Campaigns should be conversations with voters, not fund-raising contests. The time has come to put realistic limits on campaign expenditures -- and filing this amicus (brief) is an important first step.

"Reasonable limitations on campaign spending will help to reinforce public faith in government and the electoral process."

The battle is being led by Attorneys General Tom Miller of Iowa, Grant Woods of Arizona and Del Papa. Miller said the amicus brief represents the first coordinated effort by the states to seek reversal of the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The brief says, "Twenty years of experience since Buckley (the U.S. Supreme Court decision) reveal that the taint of corruption created by big money in politics has not been lifted simply by imposing limits on individual contributions." It argues the limits imposed are constitutional and campaign financing has changed since 1996.

"Just as the First Amendment does not give one the right to falsely shout 'fire' in a theater, or the right to incite a riot, it does not allow the speech of one person to drown out the speech of others," the states say. "A cap on total campaign expenditures is but one more example of a reasonable restriction."

archive