UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA 

ALEXANDRIA DIVISION 

 

 ) 

STOP RECKLESS ECONOMIC ) 

INSTABILITY CAUSED BY ) 

DEMOCRATS, et al., ) 

 ) Civ. No. 1:14-397 (AJT-IDD) 

 Plaintiffs, ) 

 ) 

 v. ) 

 ) AMENDED ANSWER 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, ) 

 ) 

 Defendant. ) 

 ) 

DEFENDANT FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION’S 

AMENDED ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ AMENDED COMPLAINT 

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

amended answer to plaintiffs’ amended complaint (Docket No. 37). Any allegation not 

specifically responded to below is DENIED. The amended complaint’s three introductory 

paragraphs (pp. 1-2) and the headings used throughout the amended complaint are statements of 

law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required: Admit that these 

portions of the amended complaint summarize or characterize certain provisions of the Federal 

Election Campaign Act (“FECA”), 2 U.S.C. §§ 431-57, which speak for themselves. Deny 

plaintiffs’ characterizations of the operation and effect of these FECA provisions and deny that 

the provisions are unconstitutional. 

The Commission responds as follows to the numbered paragraphs of the amended 

complaint: 

1. Admit that this is a constitutional challenge to a federal statute and that this Court 

generally has jurisdiction over such challenges pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. 

Case 1:14-cv-00397-AJT-IDD Document 49 Filed 07/24/14 Page 1 of 14 PageID# 477
2

Deny that this Court has jurisdiction over this case to the extent plaintiffs lack 

standing and to the extent plaintiffs’ claims are moot. 

2. Admit that to the extent jurisdiction exists in this Court, venue is proper under 28 

U.S.C. § 1391(e)(1). 

3. As to the first sentence of this paragraph, admit that plaintiff Stop Reckless 

Economic Instability caused by Democrats (“Stop PAC”) registered with the FEC 

as a nonconnected political committee, but the Commission is without knowledge 

or information sufficient to admit or deny whether Stop PAC is in fact 

nonconnected. As to the first sentence of this paragraph, admit that Stop PAC has 

informed the FEC that its address is in Alexandria, Virginia, but the Commission 

is without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny whether Stop 

PAC’s principal place of business is in Alexandria, Virginia. As to the second 

sentence of this paragraph, deny that Stop PAC filed its registration form with the 

FEC on February 24, 2014, and admit the remainder of the sentence. Plaintiff 

Stop PAC registered with the Commission on March 11, 2014, although the 

registration form was dated February 24, 2014. 

4. As to the first sentence of this paragraph, admit that plaintiff Tea Party Leadership 

Fund (“Tea Party Fund”) has listed Alexandria, Virginia as its address on the 

registration form it filed with the FEC; however, the Commission is without 

knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny whether the Tea Party 

Fund’s principal place of business is in Alexandria, Virginia. Admit the second 

sentence of this paragraph. 

5. Admit. 

Case 1:14-cv-00397-AJT-IDD Document 49 Filed 07/24/14 Page 2 of 14 PageID# 478
3

6. Admit the first sentence of this paragraph. As to the second sentence of this 

paragraph, admit that the Commission is charged with civilly enforcing FECA, as 

amended by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (“BCRA”), Pub. L. 

No. 107-155, 116 Stat. 81 (2002). 

7. This paragraph is a statement of law to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required: Admit that FECA permits the formation of a 

“political committee” as defined by 2 U.S.C. § 431(4). 

8. This paragraph is a statement of law to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required: Admit that in FECA the term “person,” as defined 

by 2 U.S.C. § 431(11), generally includes a political committee. 

9. Admit. 

10. This paragraph and its subparagraphs are statements of law to which no response 

is required. To the extent a response is required: Admit that this paragraph and 

its subparagraphs summarize certain provisions of FECA, which speak for 

themselves. 

11. This paragraph and its subparagraphs are statements of law to which no response 

is required. To the extent a response is required: Admit that this paragraph and 

its subparagraphs summarize a provision of FECA, which speaks for itself. 

12. This paragraph and its subparagraphs are statements of law to which no response 

is required. To the extent a response is required: Admit that this paragraph and 

its subparagraphs summarize certain provisions of FECA, which speak for 

themselves. 

Case 1:14-cv-00397-AJT-IDD Document 49 Filed 07/24/14 Page 3 of 14 PageID# 479
4

13. This paragraph and its table contain statements of law to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required: Admit that this paragraph and its 

table attempt to summarize provisions of FECA, which speak for themselves. 

14. This paragraph is a statement of law to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required: Admit that this paragraph summarizes a provision 

of FECA, which speaks for itself. 

15. This paragraph is a statement of law to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required: Admit that this paragraph summarizes a provision 

of Title 11 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which speaks for itself. 

16. This paragraph contains statements of law to which no response is required. To 

the extent a response is required: Admit that this paragraph attempts to 

summarize provisions of FECA, which speak for themselves. Deny this 

paragraph to the extent it suggests that the contribution limits applicable to 

political committees are “discriminatory” and that a multicandidate political 

committee is “identically situated” to a political committee that is not a 

multicandidate political committee. 

17. This paragraph contains statements of law to which no response is required. To 

the extent a response is required: Admit that this paragraph attempts to 

summarize provisions of FECA, which speak for themselves. Deny this 

paragraph to the extent it suggests that a multicandidate political committee is 

“identically situated” to a political committee that is not a multicandidate political 

committee. 

Case 1:14-cv-00397-AJT-IDD Document 49 Filed 07/24/14 Page 4 of 14 PageID# 480
5

18. Deny the first sentence of this paragraph. See Response to Paragraph 3. As to the 

second sentence of the paragraph, admit that Stop PAC has more than 150 

contributors and has made contributions to at least five candidates for federal 

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

or deny the remainder of the second sentence. 

19. Admit the first sentence of this paragraph. The second sentence of this paragraph 

is a statement of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response to 

the second sentence of this paragraph is required: Admit that Stop PAC is not a 

multicandidate political committee and may contribute up to $2,600 per election 

to any federal candidate. 

20. Admit that Stop PAC contributed $2,600 to Niger Innis on or about April 4, 2014. 

Admit that Innis ran for the Republican nomination for Congress in Nevada’s 

fourth congressional district and did not receive the nomination. 

21. Admit that had Stop PAC contributed an additional $2,400 to Innis in connection 

with the primary election, Stop PAC’s total contribution to Innis in connection 

with the primary would have been $5,000. The Commission is without 

knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remainder of this 

paragraph. The Commission notes that Stop PAC reported to the FEC on April 

15, 2014, that it had $1,845 in cash on hand as of March 31, 2014. The 

Commission also notes that Stop PAC reported to the FEC on July 8, 2014, that it 

had $7,119.70 in cash on hand as of June 30, 2014. 

22. This paragraph contains statements of law to which no response is required. To 

the extent a response is required: Admit that Stop PAC could not have 

Case 1:14-cv-00397-AJT-IDD Document 49 Filed 07/24/14 Page 5 of 14 PageID# 481
6

contributed more than a total of $2,600 to Innis in connection with the June 10, 

2014 Nevada primary election consistent with FECA. Admit that multicandidate 

political committees are permitted to contribute $5,000 per election to any federal 

candidate. The Commission is without knowledge or information sufficient to 

admit or deny the remainder of this paragraph. 

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

this paragraph. 

24. Admit. 

25. Admit that if Stop PAC contributed an additional $2,400 to federal candidate Dan 

Sullivan in connection with the August 19, 2014 primary election for the 

Republican nomination for Senate from Alaska, Stop PAC’s total contribution to 

Sullivan in connection with the primary would be $5,000. The Commission is 

without knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remainder of 

this paragraph. The Commission notes that Stop PAC reported to the FEC on 

July 8, 2014, that it had $7,119.70 in cash on hand as of June 30, 2014. 

26. This paragraph contains statements of law to which no response is required. To 

the extent a response is required: Admit that Stop PAC, during the time it is not a 

multicandidate committee, may not contribute more than a total of $2,600 to 

Sullivan in connection with the August 19, 2014 Alaska primary election 

consistent with FECA. Admit that multicandidate political committees are 

permitted to contribute $5,000 per election to any federal candidate. The 

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

remainder of this paragraph. 

Case 1:14-cv-00397-AJT-IDD Document 49 Filed 07/24/14 Page 6 of 14 PageID# 482
7

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

this paragraph. 

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

the first sentence of this paragraph. Admit the second sentence of this paragraph. 

29. Admit that Stop PAC has reported to the FEC that on April 4, 2014 it made a 

$250 contribution to Congressman Joe Heck in connection with the primary 

election for the Republican Party nomination for the U.S. House of 

Representatives in Nevada’s third congressional district. 

30. Admit that if Stop PAC contributed an additional $1,800 to Heck in connection 

with the November 4, 2014 general election, Stop PAC’s total contribution to 

Heck in connection with the November 4, 2014 general election would be $4,400. 

Admit that, before September 11, 2014, Stop PAC may not contribute more than a 

total of $2,600 to Heck in connection with the November 4, 2014 general election 

consistent with FECA. The Commission is without knowledge or information 

sufficient to admit or deny the remainder of this paragraph. 

31. This paragraph contains statements of law to which no response is required. To 

the extent a response is required: Admit that, before September 11, 2014, Stop 

PAC may not contribute more than a total of $2,600 to Heck in connection with 

the November 4, 2014 general election consistent with FECA. Admit that 

multicandidate political committees are permitted to contribute $5,000 per 

election to any federal candidate. 

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

the remainder of this paragraph. 

Case 1:14-cv-00397-AJT-IDD Document 49 Filed 07/24/14 Page 7 of 14 PageID# 483
8

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

this paragraph. 

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

whether Stop PAC’s contributors live throughout the country. Deny the 

remainder of this paragraph. 

35. Admit that Stop PAC will face a credible threat of civil enforcement proceedings 

if it makes the contribution described. Deny that Stop PAC will face a credible 

threat of criminal prosecution absent the required knowing and willful intent. 

36. Admit that the Tea Party Fund registered as a political committee with the FEC on 

May 9, 2012, and that it has made contributions to federal candidates. The 

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

remainder of this paragraph. 

37. This paragraph contains statements of law to which no responses are required. To 

the extent responses are required: Admit that the Tea Party Fund is a 

multicandidate political committee and is thus subject to FECA’s contribution 

limits for multicandidate political committees, which speak for themselves. Deny 

this paragraph to the extent it suggests that a political committee may become a 

multicandidate political committee solely due to the amount of time it has been 

registered with the FEC. 

38. Admit. 

39. Admit that the first sentence of this paragraph was accurate as of April 30, 2014. 

Admit that if the Tea Party Fund were to contribute an additional $5,000 to 

plaintiff Alexandria Republican City Committee (“Alexandria Committee”) in 

Case 1:14-cv-00397-AJT-IDD Document 49 Filed 07/24/14 Page 8 of 14 PageID# 484
9

2014, the Tea Party Fund then would have contributed a total of $10,000 to the 

Alexandria Committee in 2014. The Commission is without knowledge or 

information sufficient to admit or deny the remainder of this paragraph. 

40. This paragraph contains statements of law to which no responses are required. To 

the extent responses are required: Admit that the Tea Party Fund may not legally 

contribute as much to the Alexandria Committee and the National Republican 

Senatorial Committee as a political committee that is not a multicandidate 

committee. Deny this paragraph’s characterization of FECA’s contribution limits 

as “discriminatory.” Deny this paragraph’s suggestion that the Tea Party Fund or 

any other multicandidate political committee is “identical” in “all material 

respects” to a political committee that is not a multicandidate political committee. 

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

this paragraph. 

42. Admit that Tea Party Fund contributors live in a number of different states. Deny 

the remainder of this paragraph. 

43. This paragraph re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained 

in paragraphs 1-38 of plaintiffs’ amended complaint, and the Commission 

therefore incorporates by reference its responses to those paragraphs. 

44. This paragraph is a statement of law to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required: Admit that limits on contributions to candidates 

operate in an area of fundamental First Amendment freedoms, but deny the limits 

impose more than a marginal restriction on First Amendment rights. 

Case 1:14-cv-00397-AJT-IDD Document 49 Filed 07/24/14 Page 9 of 14 PageID# 485
10

45. This paragraph is a statement of law to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required: Admit that this paragraph characterizes the holding 

of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 (1954), which 

speaks for itself. 

46. Deny. 

47. This paragraph is a statement of law to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required: Admit that this paragraph attempts to summarize a 

provision of FECA, which speaks for itself. 

48. This paragraph is a statement of law to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required: Admit that this paragraph attempts to summarize a 

provision of FECA, which speaks for itself. Deny this paragraph to the extent it 

suggests that multicandidate political committees are “materially identical” to 

political committees that are not multicandidate political committees. 

49. Deny. 

50. Deny. 

51. This paragraph re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained 

in paragraphs 1-46 of plaintiffs’ amended complaint, and the Commission 

therefore incorporates by reference its responses to those paragraphs. 

52. This paragraph is a statement of law to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required: Admit that this paragraph attempts to summarize 

certain provisions of FECA, which speak for themselves. 

Case 1:14-cv-00397-AJT-IDD Document 49 Filed 07/24/14 Page 10 of 14 PageID# 486
11

53. This paragraph is a statement of law to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required: Admit this paragraph attempts to summarize certain 

provisions of FECA, which speak for themselves. 

54. Deny. 

55. Deny. 

56. This paragraph re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained 

in paragraphs 1-51 of plaintiffs’ amended complaint, and the Commission 

therefore incorporates by reference its responses to those paragraphs. 

57. This paragraph is a statement of law to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required: Admit that limits on contributions to candidates 

operate in an area of fundamental First Amendment freedoms, but deny the limits 

impose more than a marginal restriction on First Amendment rights. 

58. This paragraph is a statement of law to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required: Admit that this paragraph characterizes the holding 

of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 (1954), which 

speaks for itself. 

59. Deny. 

60. This paragraph is a statement of law to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required: Admit that this paragraph attempts to summarize 

provisions of FECA, which speak for themselves. 

61. This paragraph is a statement of law to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required: Admit that this paragraph attempts to summarize 

provisions of FECA, which speak for themselves. Deny this paragraph to the 

Case 1:14-cv-00397-AJT-IDD Document 49 Filed 07/24/14 Page 11 of 14 PageID# 487
12

extent it suggests that multicandidate political committees are “materially 

identical” to political committees that are not multicandidate political committees. 

62. Deny. 

63. Deny. 

THE AMENDED COMPLAINT’S PRAYER FOR RELIEF

1-4. Plaintiffs are not entitled to the relief requested or to any other relief. 

DEFENDANT FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION’S 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

1. The amended complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 

2. Plaintiffs’ claims are moot. 

3. Plaintiffs lack standing. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Lisa J. Stevenson* 

Deputy General Counsel – Law 

Kevin Deeley* 

Acting Associate General Counsel 

Harry J. Summers* 

Assistant General Counsel 

Case 1:14-cv-00397-AJT-IDD Document 49 Filed 07/24/14 Page 12 of 14 PageID# 488
13

 Holly J. Baker* 

 Kevin P. Hancock* 

 /s/ 

Esther D. Gyory (VA Bar #76826) 

EGyory@fec.gov 

Attorneys 

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

999 E Street NW 

Washington, DC 20463 

July 24, 2014 (202) 694-1650 

* Admitted pro hac vice 

Case 1:14-cv-00397-AJT-IDD Document 49 Filed 07/24/14 Page 13 of 14 PageID# 489
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA 

ALEXANDRIA DIVISION 

 

 ) 

STOP RECKLESS ECONOMIC ) 

INSTABILITY CAUSED BY ) 

DEMOCRATS, et al., ) 

 ) Civ. No. 1:14-397 (AJT-IDD) 

 Plaintiffs, ) 

 ) 

 v. ) 

 ) 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, ) 

 ) 

 Defendant. ) 

 ) 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on July 24, 2014, I will electronically file the foregoing with the 

Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will then send a notification of such filing to 

the following counsel for plaintiff: 

Dan Backer, Esq. 

DB Capitol Strategies PLLC 

203 South Union Street, Suite 300 

Alexandria, VA 22314 

DBacker@DBCapitolStrategies.com 

Michael Thomas Morley, Esq. 

Coolidge-Reagan Foundation 

1629 K Street, Suite 300 

Washington, DC 20006 

 /s/ 

Esther D. Gyory (VA Bar # 76826) 

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

999 E Street NW 

Washington, DC 20463 

Telephone: (202) 694-1650 

Fax: (202) 219-0260 

EGyory@fec.gov 

Case 1:14-cv-00397-AJT-IDD Document 49 Filed 07/24/14 Page 14 of 14 PageID# 490