What follows is an opinion from the Supreme Court of the United States. Your task is to identify whether administrative action occurred in the context of the case prior to the onset of litigation. The activity may involve an administrative official as well as that of an agency. To determine whether administration action occurred in the context of the case, consider the material which appears in the summary of the case preceding the Court's opinion and, if necessary, those portions of the prevailing opinion headed by a I or II. Action by an agency official is considered to be administrative action except when such an official acts to enforce criminal law. If an agency or agency official "denies" a "request" that action be taken, such denials are considered agency action. Exclude: a "challenge" to an unapplied agency rule, regulation, etc.; a request for an injunction or a declaratory judgment against agency action which, though anticipated, has not yet occurred; a mere request for an agency to take action when there is no evidence that the agency did so; agency or official action to enforce criminal law; the hiring and firing of political appointees or the procedures whereby public officials are appointed to office; attorney general preclearance actions pertaining to voting; filing fees or nominating petitions required for access to the ballot; actions of courts martial; land condemnation suits and quiet title actions instituted in a court; and federally funded private nonprofit organizations.

Opinion:
COMMON CAUSE et al. v. SCHMITT et al.
No. 80-847.
Argued October 7, 1981
Decided January 19, 1982
Archibald Cox argued the cause for appellants in No. 80-847. With him on the briefs were Michael L. Burack, Louis R. Cohen, Roger M. Whitten, Kenneth J. Guido, Jr., and Ellen G. Block.
Jan W. Baran argued the cause for appellees in both cases and filed a brief for appellees Schmitt et al. Roderick M. Hills, Robert K. Burgess, Robert B. Shanks, and Edward Sonnenschein, Jr., filed a brief for Americans for an Effective Presidency, appellee in No. 80-847. J. Curtis Herge filed a brief for Fund for a Conservative Majority, appellee in No. 80-1067.
Charles N. Steele argued the cause for the Federal Election Commission, intervenor-appellee in No. 80-847 and appellant in No. 80-1067. With him on the briefs were Kathleen Imig Perkins and Richard B. Bader.
Together with No. 80-1067, Federal Election Commission v. Americans for Change et al., also on appeal from the same court.
Briefs of amici curiae urging affirmance were filed by Phillip A. Lacovara, Gerald Goldman, Ronald A. Stem, Charles S. Sims, and Arthur B. Spitzer for the American Civil Liberties Union; and by Wayne T. Elliot and Allen R. Hirons for the Southeastern Legal Foundation, Inc.
Per Curiam.
The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.
Justice O’Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.

Question: Did administrative action occur in the context of the case?

Choices:
No
Yes

Answer: 0