Document: 453 U.S. 182 101 S.Ct. 2712 69 L.Ed.2d 567 CALIFORNIA MEDICAL ASSOCIATION et al., Appellants,v.FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION al. No. 79-1952. Argued Jan. 19, 1981. Decided June 26, Syllabus One provision of the Federal Election Campaign Act 1971 (Act), 2 U.S.C. § 441a(a)(1)(C), prohibits individuals and unincorporated associations from contributing more than $5,000 per calendar year to any multicandidate political committee. A related 441a(f), makes it unlawful for committees knowingly accept contributions exceeding limit. Appellant California Medical Association (CMA) is a not-for-profit association doctors, appellant Political Action Committee (CALPAC) committee formed by CMA registered with appellee Commission (FEC). When CALPAC were notified an impending enforcement proceeding FEC alleged violations §§ 441a(a)(1)(C) they, together individual members, filed declaratory judgment action in District Court challenging constitutionality these provisions. Subsequently, its same Court, pleaded as affirmative defenses constitutional claims raised their action. Pursuant special expedited review provisions Act, 437h(a), while was still pending, certified questions Appeals, which rejected upheld challenged limit on annual contributions. sought direct appeal this pursuant 437h(b). Held : The affirmed. Pp. 187-201; 201-204. 641 F.2d 619, Justice MARSHALL delivered opinion respect Parts I, II, IV, concluding that: 1 1. This has jurisdiction over appeal. There no merit FEC's contention that view overlapping judicial actions, proceedings, 437g(a)(10), because Congress failed provide mechanism coordinating cases issues are parties both proceeding, here, under 437h(b) should be limited situations proceedings since otherwise litigants, like appellants could disrupt delay undermine functioning federal courts. Neither statutory language nor legislative history 437g 437h indicates intended such limitation. 187-192. 2. Section does not violate equal protection component Fifth Amendment ground, appellants, corporation's or labor union's segregated fund unlimited association's contribution cannot without violating protection. Appellants' ignores fact whole imposes far fewer restrictions corporations unions. differing placed associations, one hand, unions, other, reflect congressional entities have structures purposes they therefore may require different forms regulation order protect integrity process. 200-201. 3 MARSHALL, joined BRENNAN, WHITE STEVENS, concluded Part III First Amendment. Nothing limits amount members independently expend advocate views; rather, restrains only contribute CALPAC. "speech proxy" seeks achieve through sort advocacy Buckley v. Valeo, 424 1, 96 612, 46 659, found entitled full Since receives 50 persons year, appellants' claim merely mouthpiece untenable. instead separate legal entity funds multiple sources engages independent advocacy. If rights contributor infringed limitations he campaign organization advocates views candidacy particular candidate, supra, similarly impaired give committee, CALPAC, candidacies number candidates. Moreover, restriction, contrary claim, appropriate means seek Valeo. 193-199. 4 BLACKMUN limitation broader necessary governmental interest preventing actual potential corruption. 5 Frederick C. Zimmerman, San Francisco, Cal., appellants. 6 Charles Nevett Steele, Washington, D. C., appellees. 7 respects III, WHITE, STEVENS joined. 8 In case we consider whether 1971, 86 Stat. 11, amended, 431 seq. (1976 ed. Supp. III), limiting Concluding constitutional, affirm Appeals Ninth Circuit. 9 * approximately 25,000 doctors residing California. 1976, (CALPAC). Commission, subject relating committees.1 provision, CALPAC.2 limit.3 10 October 1978, "reason believe" had violated making excess $5,000, unlawfully accepted informal conciliation efforts failed, April 1979 authorized staff institute civil against secure compliance Act. early May 1979, after receiving formal notification Commission's action, two organizations, United States Northern upon based. Several weeks later, Court. second suit, 11 On 17, set forth III),4 meantime, pretrial discovery preparation continued 1980, divided sitting en banc, committees. 619. Appellants determination again jurisdictional III). subsequently moved dismiss appeal, postponed ruling our pending hearing merits. 449 817, 67, 66 19 (1980).5 II 12 Because vigorously contends first complex Act.6 provides routes involving reach First, arise course brought Such actions district courts, where accorded treatment. 437g(a) (6)(A)) ed., judgments courts appealable appeals, final available certiorari certification. 437g(a)(9). 13 However, concerned extensive amendments 1974 might raise important requiring quick resolution,7 provided alternative method obtaining challenges procedure, outlined part: 14 "The national party, eligible vote election office President court States, including judgment, construe immediately shall certify all appeals circuit involved, hear matter banc." 437h(a). 15 statute further decisions reviewed 437h(b), directs expedite disposition cases, 437h(c). 16 Although thus established avenues arising proceeding. oversight allowed instituting asserted claims. argues seriously treatment required accord cases. To alleviate problems, urges narrowly so preclude use litigate been ongoing contemplated proceedings.8 Under proposed reading 437h, declined light basis, urged want jurisdiction. 17 agree scarcely blueprint efficient litigation, decline manner suggested Commission.9 suggestion indicating underway.10 expressly requires "immediately . Act" appeals. (Emphasis supplied.) We do believe would used all-encompassing restrict Commission.11 Indeed, cramped construction directly very purpose enacting 437h. It undisputed included Amendments rapid resolution These regardless contemplated. Yet approach, even most fundamental meritorious challenge but considered procedure 437g,12 if question also happened remove category purview thereby significantly usefulness surely made explicit. 18 addition, itself undercuts must held abeyance involved Commission. "put ahead other (other subsection section title )." 437g(a)(10) (emphasis added). coordinate now inconceivable chosen above language. Instead, wording plainly implies sections proceed at time. See Bread Comm'n, 591 29, 33 (CA7 1979), 80-1481. sum, although wiser orchestrate belie intention.13 conclude appeal.14 based largely Court's decision 659 (1976) (per curiam ). That broad held, inter alia, expenditures restrained citizens, candidates, engage protected speech. Id., U.S., 39-59, S.Ct., 644-654. Nonetheless, various ceilings make candidates committees, maximum aggregate year.15 reasoned did infringe ability contributors express own views, served interests corruption appearance process result restrained. 23-38, 636-644. 20 imposed is, strictly speaking, limitation, bring within reasoning Buckley. contend akin unconstitutional expenditure restricts speech viewed qualitatively Specifically, assert here flow rather danger apparent recognized sufficient justification present case. 21 While contentions some surface end unpersuasive. type constitutionally those individual, group Id. 44-48, 646-648. nonetheless insist CMA's receive because, according 22 naturally hesitant entirely unprotected Amendment.16 during year. 441a(a)(4). Thus, Of course, probably unless agreed espoused sympathy alone convert CALPAC's into CMA. 23 Our precludes argument contrary. case, organizations ground his albeit another. dismissing noted: 24 "While expression spent candidate voters, transformation debate involves someone contributor." 21, 635 25 analysis controls instant candidates.17 26 disagree restriction enacted part prevent circumvention Buckley.18 $1,000 single 441a(a)(1)(A). $25,000 441a(a)(3). position prohibit committees—is accepted, then easily evaded. up 441a(a)(2)(A), seeking evade channelling Similarly, sums year.19 concerns prompted enact clear Buckley.20 IV 27 statute, unions pay establishment, administration, solicitation expenses "separate utilized purposes." 441b(b)(2)(C). Contributions groups statute. 431(8)(B)(vi) analogous former situation, latter 28 already offend violates Amendment, find burdens greater extent differential justified. need discrimination justified discrimination. unfair plain Persons speech; however, 441b(b)(2). Furthermore, candidates' party absolutely barred generally unrestricted scope solicitations; establish §441b(b)(2)(C) carefully regard. 441b(b)(3), 441b(b)(4). corporations, purposes, electoral corporate union activity, yet discriminates exercise rights. Cf. Buckley, 95-99, 671-673. 29 Accordingly, neither 30 So ordered. 31 BLACKMUN, concurring judgment. 32 I join MARSHALL's which, extent, becomes write separately, note my appears rest premise test applied applicable limitations. proposition. dissented 290, 760, (1976), am willing binding there constitutional. 637-644. But follow concur plurality conclusion today, ante, 196, true suggest conclusion, see, e. g., 20-23, 635-636 referred when dissent principled distinction between 760. At time, states "contribution implicate interests," id., 23, 636 "governmental 'action effect curtailing freedom associate closest scrutiny,' " 25, 637, quoting NAACP Alabama, 357 449, 460-461, 78 1163, 1170-1171, 1488 (1958). can "if State demonstrates sufficiently employs closely drawn avoid unnecessary abridgment associational freedoms." 637. Note, Unconstitutionality Limitations Committees 1976 Amendments, Yale L.J. 953, 961-962 (1977). 34 Unlike plurality, apply "rigorous standard review," 639, relying what mistaken "not protection." Ante, 196. Appellees doubted. closer question, advance interest. evasion total given 38, 644. 35 stress, suggests expenditures, By definition, five office. Multicandidate essentially conduits pose perceived threat contrast, threat. repeatedly "[e]ffective public private points view, particularly controversial ones, undeniably enhanced ." 460, 1170. pooling resources, adherents amplify voices, see 22, 636; "is medium effective views." 459, corruption, narrow satisfied reached opinion. 36 STEWART, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE, POWELL, REHNQUIST join, dissenting. 37 313 created elaborate system summarized follows: 38 aware possible violation notify person responsible (who respondent). 437g(a)(2) After investigating violation, respondent recommendation General Counsel decide probable cause violated, about violate, determines cause, attempt, least 90 days, "to correct methods conference, conciliation, persuasion 437g(a)(4)(A)(i). (If probable-cause 45 days before election, days. 437g(a)(4)(A)(ii)). fails, relief court. 437g(a)(6)(A) Any appealed "[a]ny advanced docket filed, put title)." Members believed significant issues, ought expeditiously resolved. Consequently, "such Act." 437h(a) assure authoritative extraordinary procedures. "[t]he Ibid. Second, "any (a) reviewable Supreme States." procedures accomplished promptness: "It duty greatest section." 39 today holds who received nevertheless raising precisely presented holding interferes, think, proper sound ways intended. 40 addresses issue resolved holding, structure expresses Congress' intent thwarting kinds purposes. serves prompt less abstract. 41 serve instituted sets tailored each Thus Representative Hays—the chairman House bill—stated debate: delicately balanced scheme remedies out act exclusive vindicating declaring duties stated therein." 120 Cong.Rec. 35134 (1974). particular, detail public's expeditious respondent's fair accordingly (1) specified periods time accomplished, (2) directed heard ordinarily constituted panels (3) access chooses review. 42 assessment cautiously contained upset, detriment strong requirement timely disrupted engraft onto If, response graft, stayed outcome will obviously result. stayed, often caused necessity redoing work Nor abstract principle lost correctly 437g. 43 invoking able arrogate himself extraordinary—perhaps unique—right immediate banc. (Under Rule Rules Appellate Procedure, banc three-judge panel majority judges active service decided consideration uniformity circuit's exceptional importance.) Third, unusual right 44 Not careful balancing undone today's Hays Act's "comprehensive enforcement," (1974), likely strain carrying lines litigation envisions one. indication adopting author, Senator said "merely raised," 10562 (1974)—Congress either expand respondents contract Government's stop promptly.* think errs construing liberality places uncommonly heavy system. Litigants invoke impose piecemeal adjudication, dangers disadvantages: occur firm basis specific controversy fully developed record characterize proceedings. And too law avoided narrower every En hearings drain large amounts summoning larger appellate dozen judges, cumbersome well. As mandatory multiplied, calendars matters business severe disruptive." 632. hold that, formally fall bar, identity members. it. 47 defined include aggregating year." 431(4) "multicandidate committee" "political 433 period months, persons, Office." pertinent "[n]o aggregate, exceed $5,000." defines term "person" "an partnership, association, corporation, organization, persons." 431(11) Corporations prohibited 441b(a) 441b(b)(2)(C), hence governed 441a(a)(1)(C). infra, 188-189. entered favor Comm'n Assn., 502 F.Supp. 196 (1980). Initially, reject lack standing here. grant constraints Art. Constitution, 631, ), authorizes elections. last category, and, officers concrete stake address enumerated 437h's standing, section. Arlington Heights Metropolitan Housing Dev. Corp., 429 252, 264, n. 9, 97 555, 562, 450 Compare Martin Tractor Co. 460 1017 (D.C.1978), aff'd, 200 U.S.App.D.C. 322, 627 375, cert. denied sub nom. National Chamber Alliance Politics 954, 360, 218 (1980), introduced amendment incorporating raised. sure if, fact, serious legislation, everyone determined earliest time." sole explanation Frenzel, stated: "I conference report 100 items questionable standpoint. call attention bill quickly Court." 35140. maintained simultaneously claims, past argued defendants adjudicate Lance, 1132, 1137, (CA5 1981); Central Long Island Tax Reform Immediately Committee, 616 45, 48-49 (CA2 1980). Even remains unclear plaintiffs include, along CMA, doctors. 6, apparently parties, procedure. silent interaction brief discussion cover 7, supra. authorizing "institute ., judgments, Act," confers discretion "inappropriate" suits word "appropriate" embodies substantive reference preceding clause clear, concept refers form cast. example, suit damages testing facial validity event, whatever ambiguity surrounds meaning dispelled section's command constitutionality" added.) certification writ certiorari, reaching interpretation. clearly blithely concludes "neither issue" today. Post, 205. Having neatly swept aside relevant history, proceeds rewrite perceives insure "proper reconstruction, invoked "formally proceeding"; indeed "identity interests" notified. 208. concepts "formal notification" well benefit effort enforce relieve burden task us improve acknowledged interpret criticisms dissent. Supra, 190. remedy, lies Congress. justify rewriting exaggerates date, handful Courts Anderson 634 (CA1 1980); Republican summarily 445 955, 1639, 64 231 (1980); 1132 80-1481; 171 172, 519 821 (1975), aff'd rev'd part, (1976); Clark 559 642 (1972), Kimmitt, 950, 2667, 53 267 (1977); fountain questions, reasonable assume resort decrease future. circumstances, poses adopt abuse answered embodied are, least, circumscribed 631. claim. properly compel unsettled interpretation adjudication. 51-53. Nixon Administrator Services, 425, 438, 2777, 2787, 867 Thorpe Authority, 393 268, 283-284, 89 518, 527, 474 (1969); Crowell Benson, 285 62, 52 285, 296, 76 L.Ed. 598 (1932). frivolous, Gifford Congress, 452 802 (ED Cal.1978); cf. Water Service City Redding, 304 254-255, 58 865, 866-867, 82 1323 (1938) involve purely hypothetical applications See, supra; 331-333, 335-337, F.2d, 384-386, 388-390. Finally, practical matter, adjudication improper factual record. U.S.App.D.C., 325, 378; Mott 494 131, 135 (DC restrictions, enable abuses envisioned None considerations, pertain challenge. Additionally, face, susceptible resolving evidenced below, insubstantial settled. 441a(a)(1)(A), overall ceiling contributions, element "A general support communicate underlying support. quantity communication increase perceptibly size contribution, rests solely undifferentiated, symbolic contributing. most, rough index intensity contributor's candidate. money little restraint communication, permits way discuss issues." (footnote omitted). analysis, symbolize approval role attenuated resemble substantial Amicus American Civil Liberties Union construed jointly views. application applies distinct annually distinguishable common Conference Report became specifically notes: conferees' candidate's new predicated following considerations: first, opportunity circumvent candidate; second, reports reveal root source received; third, minimize adverse impact appear pursuing ends, actually advancing campaign." H.R.Conf.Rep. 94-1057, pp. 57-58 U.S.Code Cong. & Admin. News 929, 972. declared administrative "contribution" broadly gift, subscription, loan, advance, deposit anything value payment compensation personal services another rendered charge purpose." 431(8)(A)(i), (ii) (1979 sorts donations contend, earmarked support, corrupting disagree. permissible, completely dominate operations policies permitted entire operation moneys solicited converted dictated committee's main supporter. manner, influence disproportionate finances acting alone. doing, corrupt prohibit. equally 431(8)(A), assess perspective. valid superfluous defective antifraud adequately end. 441a(a)(7), 441a(a)(8). advocacy, select restrictive protecting scheme. reasonably useful supplement 27-28, 638-639 (rejecting bribery disclosure statutes eliminated limitations). approach "remove provision." 191. "whole category" consists few began. challenge, go unresolved, promptly handled begun. except "other 437h" somehow supports holding. evidence contemplates wholly

Category: 2