P. 15 to allow a party to amend its pleadings and to introduce authority or evidence at a later time. The disputed issue is whether application of NRA dictates the same remedial result-dismissal of the suit. Legi-Tech argues that it does. Separation of powers is a structural constitutional defect that makes the FEC's entire investigation and decision to file suit void ab initio. Legi-Tech therefore does not have to show any specific prejudice to warrant dismissal.
Tech thus contends that dismissal of the case, as in NRA, is the appropriate remedy.
As might be expected, the FEC resists that course, which it claims unnecessary, in part because of concern that the statute of limitations might bar reinitiation of the suit. The Harper retroactivity doctrine, although it requires the same legal rule as in NRA to be applied in this case, does not inevitably require the same remedy. The FEC correctly notes that Harper itself did not impose the same remedy as the case it followed. Here, as the FEC points out, the constitutional violation, which obliged us to dismiss the case in NRA, has been remedied-or at least the FEC purported to remedy the defect. To be sure, Legi-Tech was prejudiced, in the same manner as the NRA, when the FEC brought suit.