UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

)

REPRESENTATIVE TED LIEU, et al., )

)

Plaintiffs, ) Civ. No. 16-2201 (EGS)

)

v. )

)

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, ) ANSWER

)

Defendant. )

)

DEFENDANT FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION’S ANSWER

Defendant Federal Election Commission (“FEC” or “Commission”) submits this answer 

to the Complaint for Declaratory Judgment and Injunctive Relief filed by plaintiffs 

Representative Ted Lieu, Representative Walter Jones, Senator Jeff Merkley, State Senator 

(Ret.) John Howe, Zephyr Teachout, and Michael Wager. Any allegation not specifically 

responded to below is DENIED. 

1. This paragraph contains plaintiffs’ characterizations of judicial decisions in 

Citizens United v. FEC, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), and SpeechNow.org v. FEC, 599 F.3d 686 (D.C. 

Cir. 2010) (en banc) (“SpeechNow”), which speak for themselves, and plaintiffs’ legal 

conclusions, to which no response is required. ADMIT that independent-expenditure-only 

PACs, also commonly known as “super PACs,” were active in the years following these 

decisions.

2. This paragraph contains plaintiffs’ characterizations of the judicial decision in 

SpeechNow and plaintiffs’ legal conclusions, to which no response is required. ADMIT that 

plaintiffs filed an administrative complaint with the FEC. DENY that the Federal Election 

Campaign Act (“FECA”) prescribes a time for the Commission to act or take final action on an

Case 1:16-cv-02201-EGS Document 12 Filed 01/13/17 Page 1 of 10
2

administrative complaint, see 52 U.S.C. § 30109 (authorizing the filing of petition for judicial 

review after 120 days), and DENY that the Commission has failed to act on plaintiffs’ 

administrative complaint within the meaning of the statute. The Commission is without 

knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph. 

3. The first sentence of this paragraph and the accompanying footnote contain 

plaintiffs’ characterizations of, and a partial quote from, specified sources which speak for 

themselves, and contain plaintiffs’ characterization of unspecified press and commentary 

sources, to which no response is required. The second sentence of this paragraph contains legal 

argument and conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, 

DENY the second sentence of this paragraph. DENY that the FEC has acted unlawfully and 

DENY that FECA “contemplates” that the Court compel the FEC to “resolve the administrative 

complaint within 30 days.”

4. This paragraph describes plaintiffs’ court complaint, which speaks for itself, and 

so no response is required. 

5. This paragraph contains plaintiffs’ characterizations of FECA, the statutory 

provisions in 52 U.S.C. §§ 30116(a)(1)(C) and 30116(f), and the Commission’s regulations in 11 

C.F.R. §§ 110.1(d) and 110.1(n), which speak for themselves, and so no response is required. 

6. ADMIT that plaintiffs filed an administrative complaint with the FEC on July 7, 

2016. The remainder of this paragraph and the accompanying footnote describe the allegations 

in plaintiffs’ administrative complaint and court complaint, which speak for themselves, and so 

no response is required.

7. This paragraph contains plaintiffs’ request for relief, to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, DENY that plaintiffs are entitled to the requested 

Case 1:16-cv-02201-EGS Document 12 Filed 01/13/17 Page 2 of 10
3

relief because the Commission has not failed to act on plaintiffs’ administrative complaint within 

the meaning of 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(8)(A). 

8. This paragraph contains plaintiffs’ characterization of FECA and the judicial 

decision in Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976), which speak for themselves, and so no response 

is required. To the extent a response is required, ADMIT that Buckley contains the quoted 

language. 

9. This paragraph purports to characterize FECA and describe its legislative history, 

which speak for themselves, and so no response is required. To the extent a response is required, 

ADMIT that Congress amended FECA in 1976.

10. This paragraph contains plaintiffs’ characterizations of the cited regulations and 

rulemaking statements, which speak for themselves, and so no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, ADMIT that the cited rulemaking statements contain the quoted 

language.

11. This paragraph contains plaintiffs’ characterization of the judicial decisions in 

SpeechNow and Citizens United, which speak for themselves, and plaintiffs’ legal conclusions, to 

which no response is required. 

12. ADMIT that the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) chose not to seek the Supreme 

Court’s review of the decision in SpeechNow. To the extent the first sentence of this paragraph 

characterizes DOJ’s decision by quoting from the cited document, the cited document speaks for 

itself, and so no response is required. The second sentence of this paragraph contains plaintiffs’ 

legal conclusions, to which no response is required. 

13. The Commission is without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny 

the allegation in the last sentence. The rest of this paragraph contains plaintiffs’ 

Case 1:16-cv-02201-EGS Document 12 Filed 01/13/17 Page 3 of 10
4

characterizations of judicial decisions and law review articles, which speak for themselves, and 

plaintiffs’ legal conclusions, to which no response is required. 

14. ADMIT that the number of super PACs and the size of contributions to them have 

increased “[s]ince SpeechNow,” when super PACs first became permissible. ADMIT that in the 

two-year 2016 election cycle, there were about 3,000 super PACs reporting to the FEC and they 

had receipts and total independent expenditures over the indicated amounts through November 

2016. The Commission is otherwise without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or 

deny the allegations in this paragraph, which includes in the third sentence an analysis of the 

family relations of super PAC contributors. 

15. The Commission is without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny 

the allegations in this paragraph. The statistics in the second sentence appear to regard spending 

by 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(4) organizations that is not limited to spending reported to the 

Commission. In addition, the first sentence contains quotes from a press article, which speaks

for itself, and so no response is required. 

16. The Commission is without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny 

the allegations in this paragraph. 

17. The Commission is without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny 

the allegations in this paragraph. 

18. The first sentence of this paragraph contains plaintiffs’ legal conclusion, to which 

no response is required, and plaintiffs’ characterization of the cited law review article, which 

speaks for itself. The Commission is without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or 

deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph.

Case 1:16-cv-02201-EGS Document 12 Filed 01/13/17 Page 4 of 10
5

19. The Commission is without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny 

the allegations in this paragraph. 

20. This paragraph contains plaintiffs’ legal argument and conclusions, and so no 

response is required. 

21. ADMIT that the cited FEC advisory opinion was issued in July 2010 to a political 

committee that later became Senate Majority PAC and that the opinion contains the quoted 

language.

22. This paragraph contains legal conclusions to which no response is required. 

23. This paragraph contains plaintiffs’ characterization of the judicial decision in 

SpeechNow, which speaks for itself, and plaintiff’s legal conclusions, to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, the Commission is without knowledge or 

information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations in this paragraph.

24. ADMIT that 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(8) provides statutory jurisdiction over Count I 

and that 28 U.S.C. § 1331 provides for federal question jurisdiction over Count I in the district 

court. DENY that this Court has jurisdiction over Count II. 

25. ADMIT that 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(8) provides for venue in the United States 

District Court for the District of Columbia.

26. ADMIT that Ted Lieu is a United States Representative from California’s 33rd 

congressional district and a member of the Democratic Party. ADMIT that American Alliance 

and Bold Agenda PAC reported to the FEC that they spent funds opposing his 2014 campaign or 

supporting his opponent, and that American Alliance reported to the FEC that it spent about 

$506,407 opposing his 2014 campaign or supporting his opponent, of which $500,000 was 

Case 1:16-cv-02201-EGS Document 12 Filed 01/13/17 Page 5 of 10
6

reported as being contributed by a single donor. The Commission is without knowledge or 

information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph.

27. ADMIT that Representative Lieu ran for re-election in 2016. To the extent the 

remainder of the paragraph contains plaintiffs’ legal conclusions, no response is required. The 

Commission is without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining 

allegations in this paragraph.

28. ADMIT that Walter Jones is a United States Representative from North 

Carolina’s 3rd congressional district and a member of the Republican Party. ADMIT that 

Ending Spending Action Fund is now known as ESAFund and that Ending Spending Action 

Fund reported to the FEC that in the 2014 election cycle, it spent about $381,353 opposing 

Representative Jones and about $353,251 supporting his then-opponent, William Taylor Griffin.

29. ADMIT that Representative Jones ran for re-election in 2016. To the extent the 

remainder of the paragraph contains plaintiffs’ legal conclusions, no response is required. The 

Commission is without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining 

allegations in this paragraph.

30. ADMIT that Jeff Merkley is a United States Senator from Oregon and a member 

of the Democratic Party. ADMIT that Freedom Partners Action Fund, Inc. reported to the FEC 

that in the 2014 election cycle, it spent about $1,020,015 opposing Senator Merkley. The 

Commission is without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining 

allegations in this paragraph.

31. To the extent this paragraph contains plaintiffs’ legal conclusions, no response is 

required. The Commission is without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the 

remaining allegations in this paragraph.

Case 1:16-cv-02201-EGS Document 12 Filed 01/13/17 Page 6 of 10
7

32. ADMIT that John Howe is a former member of the Minnesota state senate, that he 

was a Republican candidate in the 2016 United States House of Representatives election to 

represent Minnesota’s 2nd congressional district, and that he did not win the August 2016 

Republican primary election. ADMIT that House Majority PAC reported to the FEC that it spent 

about $759,432 opposing the Republican candidate for Minnesota’s 2nd congressional district.

The Commission is without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining 

allegations in this paragraph.

33. ADMIT that Zephyr Teachout was the Democratic candidate in the 2016 election 

to represent New York’s 19th congressional district in the United States House of 

Representatives. The Commission is without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or 

deny the remaining allegation in this paragraph.

34. ADMIT that New York Wins PAC reported to the FEC that it spent over

$915,000 opposing the Republican primary candidate Andrew Heaney, who lost the Republican 

primary election, and ADMIT that the Congressional Leadership Fund reported to the FEC that it 

spent over 3,596,000 opposing Zephyr Teachout in the general election. To the extent this 

paragraph contains plaintiffs’ legal conclusions, no response is required. The Commission is 

without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining allegations in this 

paragraph.

35. ADMIT that Michael Wager was the Democratic candidate in the 2016 election to 

represent Ohio’s 14th congressional district in the United States House of Representatives, and 

that he was a candidate for the same office in 2014 when he ran against the incumbent,

Representative David Joyce. ADMIT that in 2016, plaintiff Wager again ran against 

Representative Joyce. ADMIT that Defending Main Street SuperPAC Inc. reported to the FEC 

Case 1:16-cv-02201-EGS Document 12 Filed 01/13/17 Page 7 of 10
8

that in the 2014 election cycle, it spent $82,000 opposing Wager and $39,550 supporting his 

then-opponent, Representative Joyce, and that Defending Main Street SuperPAC Inc. reported to 

the FEC that in the 2016 election cycle, it spent over $243,000 supporting Representative Joyce. 

The Commission is without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining 

allegations in this paragraph.

36. To the extent this paragraph contains plaintiffs’ legal conclusions, no response is 

required. The Commission is without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the 

remaining allegations in this paragraph.

37. ADMIT.

38. ADMIT that plaintiffs filed an administrative complaint with the FEC on July 7, 

2016. The second sentence of this paragraph describes plaintiffs’ administrative complaint, 

which speaks for itself, and requires no response. Without responding to plaintiffs’ allegations 

regarding whether they were included in an administrative complaint, the Commission responds 

to the alleged facts themselves in paragraphs 39-76.

39-46. ADMIT that the transaction described in this paragraph was reported to the FEC.

47. ADMIT that Congressional Leadership Fund reported to the FEC that in March 

2016, it accepted a $1,000,000 contribution from Chevron (Corporation) of Concord, CA.

48-59. ADMIT that the transaction described in this paragraph was reported to the FEC.

60. ADMIT that Bold Agenda PAC reported to the FEC that on October 14, 2014, it 

accepted a contribution of $110,000 from Americans for Shared Prosperity, which is registered 

under 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code, and that Bold Agenda PAC reported 

to the FEC that on October 16, 2014, it accepted a contribution of $250,000 from John Jordan of 

Case 1:16-cv-02201-EGS Document 12 Filed 01/13/17 Page 8 of 10
9

Healdsburg, CA, who is the CEO of Jordan Winery. The Commission is without knowledge or 

information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining allegation in this paragraph.

61-76. ADMIT that the transaction described in this paragraph was reported to the FEC.

77. This paragraph describes allegations in plaintiffs’ administrative complaint, which 

speaks for itself, and requires no response.

78. This paragraph describes plaintiffs’ administrative complaint, which speaks for 

itself, and requires no response. 

79. ADMIT.

80. Without a protective order in place, any potentially responsive information would 

be protected from disclosure pursuant to 11 C.F.R. § 111.21, and thus no response is permitted at 

this time. 

81. DENY.

82. DENY. 

83. The Commission incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs of its answer 

as if fully set forth here. 

84. DENY.

85. The Commission incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs of its answer 

as if fully set forth here.

86. DENY.

REQUESTED RELIEF

No response is required to Paragraphs (a) through (e) of plaintiffs’ requested relief, but 

plaintiffs are entitled to none of the requested relief. 

Case 1:16-cv-02201-EGS Document 12 Filed 01/13/17 Page 9 of 10
10

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

1. This Court lacks jurisdiction over Count II.

2. Count II fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Respectfully submitted,

Lisa J. Stevenson (D.C. Bar No. 457628)

Acting General Counsel

lstevenson@fec.gov

Kevin Deeley

Associate General Counsel

kdeeley@fec.gov

Harry J. Summers

Assistant General Counsel

hsummers@fec.gov

/s/ Sana Chaudhry

Sana Chaudhry

Attorney

schaudhry@fec.gov

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

999 E Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20463

January 13, 2017 (202) 694-1650

Case 1:16-cv-02201-EGS Document 12 Filed 01/13/17 Page 10 of 10