Statement by Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer
The RNC filed a lawsuit today in Federal District Court in Washington, D.C. challenging for the third time the ban on national parties raising and spending unlimited contributions, or soft money. They have lost this same argument twice before in the Supreme Court.
The RNC lost this argument in the Supreme Court in the McConnell case in 2003 and lost again in the RNC case in 2010, decided after the Citizens United decision.
In the 2010 RNC case, Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito joined in the 6 to 3 Supreme Court decision that summarily upheld the lower court decision reaffirming the constitutionality of the soft money ban.
The RNC cannot get around the soft money ban and the Supreme Court decisions upholding the ban by the use of blue smoke and mirrors.
The RNC has no basis for bringing this lawsuit and apparently wants to obtain three strikes before they will accept the fact that they cannot raise and spend soft money.
The RNC is attempting to sell an illusion that the RNC can raise and spend soft money without raising and spending the soft money that the law, upheld by the Supreme Court, prohibits the RNC from raising and spending.
The RNC is also attempting to make believe that the two previous losses they had in the Supreme Court in challenging the soft money ban somehow aren’t relevant to this case and the RNC’s desire to raise and spend soft money.
Representative Chris Van Hollen intervened in the 2010 RNC case to defend the ban on political party soft money and he has indicated he will move to intervene in the RNC case filed today.
Democracy 21 lawyers will join with others in representing Representative Van Hollen in this case, as we did in the 2010 RNC case.
Federal law prohibits the national parties from raising contributions above the federal contribution limits, or soft money, and from spending any such funds.
Federal law also prohibits federal officeholders and national party officials from soliciting any such soft money contributions.