NVRI: National Voting Rights Institute

The Case Below: Second Circuit Rulings and Briefs

In a groundbreaking decision in August 2004, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit became the first federal appeals court to uphold campaign spending limits since the Supreme Court struck limits on congressional campaign spending in its 1976 decision, Buckley v. Valeo. The Court ruled that Vermont established two compelling governmental interests that justify its campaign spending limits: preventing the reality and appearance of corruption and protecting the time of candidates and elected officials.

Vermont's Act 64, passed in 1997, was initially brought before federal District Court in late 1998, when right-to-life groups and other plaintiffs challenged the law by alleging that spending caps are unconstitutional. NVRI, together with a coalition of reform organizations and reform-minded legislators and citizens, intervened to defend the constitutionality of the spending caps, with the ultimate aim of bringing the question of spending caps back to the U.S. Supreme Court. In an August 2000 opinion, the District Court ruled that Vermont had presented a compelling case in favor of spending limits. The ruling stated, however, that in the absence of further guidance from the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Buckley required the Court to strike down the limits regardless of the compelling state interests they served.

After a protracted review, including an initial ruling by the Appeals Court in 2002, the landmark decision upholding spending limits was finally issued in August of 2004. This site includes rulings and briefings from the Second Circuit's consideration of Vermont's campaign spending limits.

Fact Sheet
Second Circuit Decision
Second Circuit Rulings on Rehearing en Banc
Defendants' Briefs