UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

 

 ) 

THE TEA PARTY LEADERSHIP ) 

FUND, et al., ) 

 ) Civ. No. 12-1707 (RWR) 

 Plaintiffs, ) 

 ) 

 v. ) 

 ) 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, ) ANSWER 

 ) 

 Defendant. ) 

 ) 

DEFENDANT FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ 

VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 

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

to plaintiffs’ complaint (Docket No. 1). Any allegation not specifically responded to below is 

DENIED. The Commission responds as follows to the numbered paragraphs of the complaint: 

1. The first two sentences of this paragraph are statements of law to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required: Deny that the first two sentences of this 

paragraph are accurate statements of law. The Commission is without knowledge or 

information sufficient to admit or deny the third sentence of this paragraph.

2. Admit that plaintiff Tea Party Leadership Fund (“TPLF”) filed a Statement of 

Organization with the Commission on May 9, 2012; that TPLF was registered with the 

Commission for six months as of November 9, 2012; and that November 9, 2012, was 

three days after the November 6 general election. The Commission is without knowledge 

or information sufficient to admit or deny the remainder of this paragraph. Footnote 1 is 

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

Deny that footnote 1 is as an accurate statement of law.

Case 1:12-cv-01707-RWR Document 12 Filed 12/17/12 Page 1 of 9
2

3. Admit the first sentence of this paragraph. The Commission is without knowledge or 

information sufficient to admit or deny the second sentence of this paragraph.

4. Admit the first sentence of this paragraph. The Commission is without knowledge or 

information sufficient to admit or deny the second sentence of this paragraph.

5. Admit that TPLF has contributed $2,500 each to plaintiffs Raese and Bielat. The 

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

remainder of this paragraph.

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

response is required: Admit that this paragraph quotes, with alterations to the original 

text, a portion of the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974 (“FECA 

Amendments of 1974”). 

7. 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 certain provisions of the 

FECA Amendments of 1974, but deny that the description of the aggregate contribution 

limit is an accurate statement of law. 

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

response is required: Admit that the Supreme Court reviewed the constitutionality of the 

six-month registration requirement for multicandidate political committees in Buckley v. 

Valeo, which was decided in 1976, and that this paragraph quotes, with alterations to the 

original text, a portion of the Supreme Court’s opinion in that case. 

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

response is required: Admit that this paragraph quotes, with alterations to the original 

text, a portion of the Supreme Court’s opinion in Buckley v. Valeo, but deny that 

Case 1:12-cv-01707-RWR Document 12 Filed 12/17/12 Page 2 of 9
3

plaintiffs’ characterization of the Supreme Court’s holding in that case is an accurate 

statement of law. 

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

response is required: Deny that the first two sentences of this paragraph are accurate 

statements of law and admit the third sentence of this paragraph. 

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

response is required: Deny that the first two sentences of this paragraph are accurate 

statements of law and admit that the parenthetical at the end of this paragraph paraphrases 

the affiliation rule codified at 2 U.S.C. § 441a(a)(5). 

12. Deny. 

13. Deny. 

14. Admit that the Commission issued an advisory opinion concluding that FECA prohibited 

TPLF, at the time of its advisory opinion request, from making contributions to federal 

candidates in amounts greater than $2,500. Deny plaintiffs’ characterization of the 

Commission’s advisory opinion. 

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

allegation in this paragraph. 

16. Deny. 

17. Deny. 

18. Deny that this Court has jurisdiction over this case to the extent plaintiffs’ claims are 

moot. Deny that the Declaratory Judgment Act conveys jurisdiction over this case. 

19. Admit. 

Case 1:12-cv-01707-RWR Document 12 Filed 12/17/12 Page 3 of 9
4

20. This paragraph repeats the allegations of paragraph 2, and the Commission therefore 

incorporates by reference its response to that paragraph. 

21. Admit. 

22. Admit, except deny that plaintiff Bielat was a “challenger” for this seat. 

23. Admit that the Commission is charged with civil enforcement of the Federal Election 

Campaign Act and is located in Washington, DC. 

24-27. These paragraphs repeat the allegations of paragraph 2-5, respectively, and the 

Commission therefore incorporates by reference its responses to those paragraphs. 

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

response is required: Admit that this paragraph quotes a portion of the Supreme Court’s 

opinion in Buckley v. Valeo, but deny that plaintiffs’ characterization of that opinion is an 

accurate statement of law. 

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

response is required: Admit that this paragraph quotes a portion of the Supreme Court’s 

opinion in NAACP v. Alabama ex rel. Patterson, but deny that plaintiffs’ characterization 

of that opinion is an accurate statement of law. 

30-35. These paragraphs repeat the allegations of paragraphs 6-11, respectively, and the 

Commission therefore incorporates by reference its responses to those paragraphs. 

36. Deny that this paragraph’s hypothetical scenario accurately reflects the law in effect in 

1976. 

37. Deny that this paragraph’s hypothetical scenario accurately reflects the law in effect in 

1977. Deny the last sentence of the paragraph. 

Case 1:12-cv-01707-RWR Document 12 Filed 12/17/12 Page 4 of 9
5

38. This paragraph repeats the allegations of paragraph 12, and the Commission therefore 

incorporates by reference its response to that paragraph. 

39. This paragraph repeats the allegations of paragraph 13, and the Commission therefore 

incorporates by reference its response to that paragraph. 

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

response is required: Admit that this paragraph quotes, with alterations to the original 

text, portions of the cited court decisions, but deny that plaintiffs’ characterizations of 

those decisions are accurate statements of law. 

41. Deny. 

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

response is required: Admit that the second sentence of this paragraph quotes a portion 

of the Supreme Court’s decision in Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan, but deny that 

plaintiffs’ characterization of that decision in the first sentence of this paragraph is an 

accurate statement of law. Deny the third sentence of this paragraph, except admit that a 

political committee is not required to obtain a permit or license. 

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

response is required: Admit that this paragraph quotes a portion of the Supreme Court’s 

decision in Thomas v. Collins, but deny that the remainder of this paragraph is an 

accurate statement of law. 

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

response is required: Admit that this paragraph quotes a portion of the Supreme Court’s 

decision in Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of New York, Inc. v. Village of Stratton, but 

deny that plaintiffs’ characterization of that decision is an accurate statement of law. 

Case 1:12-cv-01707-RWR Document 12 Filed 12/17/12 Page 5 of 9
6

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

response is required: Deny that this paragraph is an accurate statement of law. 

46. Deny the first sentence of this paragraph. The Commission is without knowledge or 

information sufficient to admit or deny the second sentence of this paragraph. 

47. Deny. 

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

response is required: Deny that this paragraph is an accurate statement of law. 

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

response is required: Admit that this paragraph quotes, with alterations to the original 

text, a portion of the Supreme Court’s decision in Davis v. FEC, but deny the remainder 

of this paragraph. 

50. Deny. 

51. Admit. 

52. Admit. 

53. Admit that the Commission’s Office of General Counsel submitted to the Commission a 

draft advisory opinion on October 3, 2012. Deny plaintiffs’ characterization of the draft 

advisory opinion. 

54. Admit, except deny that the Commission “resolved” a particular way to “handle” 

plaintiffs’ advisory opinion request. 

55. Admit that the Commission’s Secretary certified the Commission’s vote on plaintiffs’ 

advisory opinion request on October 10, 2012. Deny plaintiffs’ characterization of the 

certification. 

Case 1:12-cv-01707-RWR Document 12 Filed 12/17/12 Page 6 of 9
7

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

response is required: Deny that this paragraph is an accurate statement of law. 

57. Deny. 

58. Admit that plaintiffs filed an advisory opinion request less than 60 days before the 

November 2012 election. Deny the remainder of this paragraph. 

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

sentence of this paragraph. Deny the remainder of this paragraph, except admit that 

“TPLF was free to endorse its preferred candidates.” 

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

sentence of this paragraph. Deny the remainder of this paragraph. 

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

paragraph. 

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

paragraph. 

63. Deny. 

64. Deny that 2 U.S.C. § 441a(a)(1)(C) imposes a $2,500 contribution limit. The 

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

remainder of this paragraph. 

65. Deny that 2 U.S.C. § 441a(a)(1)(C) imposes a $2,500 contribution limit. The 

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

remainder of this paragraph. 

66. The Commission incorporates by reference its answers to the preceding paragraphs. 

Case 1:12-cv-01707-RWR Document 12 Filed 12/17/12 Page 7 of 9
8

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

paragraph. 

68. Deny. 

69. Deny. 

70. Deny. 

71. The Commission incorporates by reference its answers to the preceding paragraphs. 

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

sentence of this paragraph. Deny the second sentence of this paragraph generally; 

specifically deny that 2 U.S.C. § 441a(a)(1)(C) imposes a $2,500 contribution limit. 

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

paragraph. 

74. Deny. 

75. Deny. 

76. Deny. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF 

77-87. Plaintiffs are not entitled to the relief requested, or to any other relief. 

 

Case 1:12-cv-01707-RWR Document 12 Filed 12/17/12 Page 8 of 9
9

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

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

2. Plaintiffs’ claims are moot. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Anthony Herman (D.C. Bar No. 424643) 

General Counsel 

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

Deputy General Counsel – Law 

David Kolker (D.C. Bar No. 394558) 

Associate General Counsel 

Adav Noti (D.C. Bar No. 490714) 

Acting Assistant General Counsel 

 

 /s/ Kevin Hancock 

Erin Chlopak (D.C. Bar No. 496370) 

echlopak@fec.gov 

Kevin P. Hancock 

khancock@fec.gov 

Attorneys 

 COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT 

 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

 999 E Street NW 

 Washington, DC 20463 

December 17, 2012 (202) 694-1650 

Case 1:12-cv-01707-RWR Document 12 Filed 12/17/12 Page 9 of 9