Your web browser is not supported You're using Internet Explorer, some features might not work. Please switch to another browser like Chrome, Firefox, or Edge for a better experience.


An official website of the United States government Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .gov**
            
            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
            
            A **lock** ( A locked padlock ) or **https://** means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Federal Election Commission | United States of America Calendar
           Glossary
          Search
              Search


Menu
      Home
      Campaign finance data
        All data
            Raising
            Spending
            Loans and debts
            Filings and reports
            Candidates
            Committees
            Bulk data
            Campaign finance statistics
        Find elections. Search by state or ZIP code
          Look up contributions from specific individuals
      Help for candidates and committees
        All compliance resources
            Guides
            Forms
            Dates and deadlines
            Trainings
        Learn about electronic filing
          Find and contact your committee's analyst
      Legal resources
        All legal resources
            Advisory opinions
            Enforcement
            Statutes
            Legislation
            Regulations
            Court cases
            Policy and other guidance
        Search across all legal resources
          Search guidance documents
      About
        All about the FEC
            News and announcements
            Commission meetings
            Mission and history
            Leadership and structure
            Reports about the FEC
            Careers
            Working with the FEC
            Contact
        Introduction to campaign finance and elections


- Home
- ›
        Legal resources
- ›
        Court cases
- ›
      Stop Reckless Economic Instability Caused by Democrats, et al. v. FEC

Stop Reckless Economic Instability Caused by Democrats, et al. v. FEC 
 Summary
          
            Documents
 Summary

  
  
    On February 23, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued a decision in Stop Reckless Economic Instability Caused by Democrats ("Stop PAC"), et al. v. FEC vacating and remanding in part and affirming in part a judgment of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.The plaintiffs—a group of political committees and a federal candidate [1]—had challenged the differing contribution limits for multicandidate and non-multicandidate political action committees (PACs). They contended that the limits infringed on their First Amendment rights of association and expression, as well as the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection. The appeals court dismissed as moot the challenge to the limits for non-multicandidate committees, and affirmed the district court's judgment that the multicandidate limits do not violate the equal protection guarantee of the Fifth Amendment.On April 22, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied the plaintiffs' petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc of the appeals court's February 2016 ruling.On October 31, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court denied Stop PAC's Petition for Writ of Certiorari.Legal background and constitutional challengeThe Federal Election Campaign Act (the Act) and Commission regulations define a multicandidate committee as a political committee (PAC) that has received contributions from more than 50 persons, has contributed to five or more federal candidates, and has been registered with the FEC for at least six months. 52 U.S.C. § 30116(a)(4) and 11 CFR 100.5(e)(3). A multicandidate committee may contribute up to $5,000 per election to a federal candidate, up to $5,000 per calendar year to a state political party committee, and up to $15,000 per calendar year to a national party committee. During the 2015-16 election cycle, committees that have not met the three qualifications above (non-multicandidate committees) may contribute up to $2,700 per election to a federal candidate, up to $10,000 per calendar year to a state political party committee, and up to $33,400 per calendar year to any national party committee. The limits on non-multicandidate committee contributions to candidates and national party committees are indexed for inflation each election cycle.At the time this suit was filed, Stop PAC was a non-multicandidate committee because it was less than six-months old. Stop PAC challenged the six-month registration period as infringing on its First Amendment rights, and also claimed that the lower $2,700 limit on its contributions to federal candidates violated its Fifth Amendment guarantee of equal protection. Similarly, the Tea Party Fund, a multicandidate plaintiff, alleged that the $5,000 and $15,000 annual limits on its respective contributions to state and national party committees violated the Fifth Amendment by imposing lower limits than would apply if the Fund had not qualified as a multicandidate committee.In its response, the Commission argued that Stop PAC and American Future PAC (the plaintiff added after Stop PAC became a multicandidate committee) did not have standing to sue because they had not suffered any cognizable injury under law. The Commission also argued that Stop PAC and American Future PAC’s challenge was partially moot because both PACs had qualified as multicandidate committees under the Act. The Commission further argued that the plaintiffs’ claims lacked merit because the six-month registration period and the challenged contribution limits help prevent the risk and appearance of corruption.District court decisionIn its February 27, 2015, opinion, the district court held that the PACs could not "show that they have suffered a cognizable constitutional injury."The court noted that Stop PAC and American Future PAC were still fully able to associate with candidates of their choice and, citing the Supreme Court’s holding in Buckley v. Valeo, held that the monetary contribution limits imposed on them as non-multicandidate committees did not violate their First Amendment rights.The district court also held that the Act’s varying contribution limits do not violate the plaintiffs' Fifth Amendment equal protection guarantee because multicandidate and non-multicandidate PACs are not "similarly situated" as they relate to core political purposes. The court stated that even if multicandidate and non-multicandidate committees were similarly situated, the government has a sufficient interest in preventing corruption of the political process and the circumvention of contribution limits to justify different contribution limits that apply to new PACs and those that apply to multicandidate committees.Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decisionThe appeals court agreed with the Commission's argument that Stop PAC and American Future PAC's claims became moot once they qualified as multicandidate committees, since that change in status ensured that Stop PAC and American Future PAC would never again be bound by the same contribution limits that they were challenging. Accordingly, since Stop PAC and American Future PAC each met multicandidate status before the district court granted summary judgment, the Court of Appeals held that the district court erred in not dismissing the challenge to the contribution limits as they apply to non-multicandidate committees.With respect to the contribution limits that apply to multicandidate committees, the appeals court held that the Tea Party Fund’s challenges were not moot since there is a reasonable expectation that the challenged contribution limits will be applied against the Tea Party Fund during a future election cycle.The appeals court held that the challenged limits in this case did not violate the Fifth Amendment's equal protection guarantee. The decrease in the amount of contributions that multicandidate political committees may make annually to national, state and local political party committees "is more than counteracted by the increase in the limits in the amount of contributions that [multicandidate committees] can make to individual candidates." The court concluded that since the plaintiffs could not demonstrate that the Act's contribution limits discriminate against multicandidate committees, the Commission was entitled to summary judgment.On April 22, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied the plaintiffs' petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc.On October 31, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court denied Stop PAC's Petition for Writ of Certiorari.FOOTNOTE:[1] The original challenge had included Niger Innis, a federal candidate plaintiff whom the court dismissed at the plaintiffs’ request. Non-multicandidate plaintiff Stop PAC became a multicandidate committee on September 11, 2014. Later, another non-multicandidate committee, American Future PAC, was added as a plaintiff to assert Stop PAC’s claims. American Future PAC became a multicandidate committee on February 11, 2015.Source: FEC Record — November 2016; April 2016; February 2016; April 2015; May 2014
 Documents

  
  
    Supreme CourtCourt decisions:Certiorari Denied (10/31/2016)Related documents:Reply in Support of Petition for Writ of Certiorari (10/17/2016)Brief for the Respondent in Opposition (09/23/2016)Brief of Amicus Curiae for Cato Institute in Support of Petitioners (08/24/2016)Brief of Amicus Curiae for Ventura County Republican Party in Support of Appellants (08/23/2016)Petition for Writ of Certiorari (July 2016)Appeals Court (4th Circuit) (15-1455)Court decisions:Mandate (05/02/2016)Order (04/22/2016)Judgment (02/23/2016)Opinion (02/23/2016)Related documents:Appellants' Motion for Panel Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc (04/08/2016)Appellants' and Intervenor-Appellant's Reply Brief (08/24/2015)Response Brief of Appellee FEC (08/10/2015)Appellants' and Intervenor-Appellant's Opening Brief (07/08/2015)District Court (E.D. VA)Court decisions:Order (05/18/2016)Memorandum Opinion (02/27/2015)Order (02/27/2015)Judgment (02/27/2015)Order (07/24/2014)Order (07/23/2014)Order (06/18/2014)Related documents:Plaintiffs' and Plaintiff-Intervenor's Notice of Appeal (04/22/2015)Defendant FEC's Suggestion of Mootness (02/24/2015)Plaintiff-Intervenor American Future PAC's Response to FEC's Supplemental Factual Submission and Briefing (11/21/2014)Defendant FEC's Response to Intervenor-Plaintiff American Future PAC's Supplemental Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (11/21/2014)Intervenor-Plaintiff American Future PAC's Supplemental Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (11/14/2014)Defendant FEC's Supplemental Factual Submission and Briefing Pertaining to Intervenor American Future PAC in Support of the Commission's Motion for Summary Judgment (11/14/2014)Rebuttal Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs' and American Future PAC's Motion for Summary Judgment (10/09/2014)Defendant FEC's Rebuttal in Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment (10/09/2014)Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Opposition to FEC's Motion for Summary Judgment (10/03/2014)Defendant FEC's Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment (10/03/2014)Defendant FEC's Motion for Summary Judgment (09/19/2014)Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment (09/19/2014)Amended Rebuttal Brief of Plaintiffs and Putative Plaintiff-Intervenor American Future PAC in Support of their Motion for Joinder (09/15/2014)Defendant FEC's Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion to Join American Future PAC (09/08/2014)Motion of Plaintiffs and Putative Plaintiff-Intervenor American Future PAC Seeking Leave for American Future PAC to Join the Suit (08/27/2014)Defendant FEC's Amended Answer to Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint (07/24/2014)Plaintiffs' Consolidated Rebuttal Brief in Support of Motion to Amend Complaint and Dismiss Niger Innis' and Niger Innis for Congress' Claims (07/21/2014)Defendant FEC's Combined Response in Partial Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Voluntary Dismissal and Motion to Amend or Supplement the Complaint (07/17/2014)Defendant FEC's Combined Response in Partial Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Voluntary Dismissal and Motion to Amend or Supplement the Complaint (07/17/2014)Amended Complaint (07/07/2014)Motion of Plaintiffs SREICD, et al. to Amend and Supplement Complaint Pursuant to FED.R.Civ.P. 15(a), (d) (07/07/2014)Motion of Plaintiffs SREICD, et al. to Amend and/or Supplement Complaint Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a) and/or (d) (07/07/2014)Plaintiffs' Motion Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(2) to Voluntarily Dismiss Plaintiffs Niger Innis and Niger Innis for Congress (07/03/2014)Defendant FEC's Answer to Plaintiffs' Complaint (06/16/2014)Defendant FEC's Rebuttal Memorandum in Support of Motion to Allow Time for Discovery under Rule 56(d) (06/02/2014)Plaintiffs' Rebuttal Brief in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment and Against Defendant's Rule 56(d) Motion (05/27/2014)Defendant FEC's Memorandum in Support of Motion to Allow Time for Discovery under Rule 56(d) and in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment (05/23/2014)Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment (05/06/2014)Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment (05/06/2014)Complaint (04/17/2014)


This information is not intended to replace the law or to change its meaning, nor does this information create or confer any rights for or on any person or bind the Federal Election Commission or the public. The reader is encouraged also to consult the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended (52 U.S.C. 30101 et seq.), Commission regulations (Title 11 of the Code of Federal Regulations), Commission advisory opinions and applicable court decisions.


About
          Careers
          Press
          Contact
   Privacy and security policy
          Plain language
          No FEAR Act
          Strategy, budget and performance
 Open government
          Protected Voices
          USA.gov
          Inspector General
          FOIA
 OpenFEC API
          GitHub repository
          Release notes
          FEC.gov status


Federal Election Commission
 The FEC's Twitter page
            The FEC's YouTube page Sign up for FECMail


Hide glossary Glossary Search terms