§Why CasetextPricing

Christian Civic League of Maine, Inc. v. Federal Election Commission

RESPONSE re Scheduling Order,,

17 Cited authorities

  1. Los Angeles v. Lyons

    461 U.S. 95 (1983)   Cited 7,503 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding there is no justiciable controversy where plaintiff had once been subjected to a chokehold

  2. Roe v. Wade

    410 U.S. 113 (1973)   Cited 4,089 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding that end of pregnancy did not moot the case because the plaintiff was capable of becoming pregnant again

  3. First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti

    435 U.S. 765 (1978)   Cited 1,076 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that campaign finance law prohibiting certain corporate donations violated the First Amendment

  4. DeFunis v. Odegaard

    416 U.S. 312 (1974)   Cited 1,087 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the plaintiff’s challenge to the law school’s admission procedure was moot because the plaintiff, who "brought the suit on behalf of himself alone, and not as the representative of any class," was enrolled at the law school and would "complete his law school studies at the end of the term for which he [was] registered regardless of any decision th[e] Court might reach on the merits of th[e] litigation"

  5. Meyer v. Grant

    486 U.S. 414 (1988)   Cited 549 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the circulation of a petition seeking a ballot initiative is an "interactive communication concerning political change that is appropriately described as ‘core political speech’ "

  6. Norman v. Reed

    502 U.S. 279 (1992)   Cited 428 times
    Holding in the election law context that a challenge to the petitioners’ ability to appear on the 1990 ballot under the Harold Washington Party name was not moot even though the 1990 election had passed because "[t]here would be every reason to expect the same parties to generate a similar, future controversy subject to identical time constraints"

  7. Federal Election Commission v. Massachusetts Citizens for Life, Inc.

    479 U.S. 238 (1986)   Cited 315 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an organization that "only occasionally engage[d] in independent spending on behalf of candidates" could not be subjected to PAC-style disclosure requirements

  8. Moore v. Ogilvie

    394 U.S. 814 (1969)   Cited 516 times
    Holding that the use of nomination petitions by independent candidates is a procedure that "must pass muster against the charges of discrimination or of abridgment of the right to vote"

  9. New Hampshire Right to Life v. Gardner

    99 F.3d 8 (1st Cir. 1996)   Cited 214 times
    Holding that, in pre-enforcement challenge to statute on First Amendment grounds, dispositive inquiry was presence of injury-in-fact, because any injury was traceable to challenged statute and declaratory relief against government officials would redress the injury

  10. California Pro-Life Council, Inc. v. Getman

    328 F.3d 1088 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 153 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a group had standing when the group showed, among other things, that it had planned to spend over $1000 to defeat a specific California proposition in the November 2000 election

  11. Section 437g - Transferred

    2 U.S.C. § 437g   Cited 275 times
    Explaining the exhaustion procedure before a private party can bring a federal action to enforce the Federal Election Campaign Act