News stories are predicting of flood of corporate campaign spending and an edge for lobbyists after yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling striking down restrictions on corporate electioneering.
Yesterday’s decision striking down a ban on corporate campaign expenditures on behalf of political candidates could indicate the Supreme Court is now willing to act more boldly in striking down…
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that corporations have a First Amendment right to expressly support political candidates for Congress and the White House.
A Duane Morris partner who led the legal team for Republican Scott Brown, the winner of the Massachusetts special Senate election, dealt with the usual issues:…
Why hasn’t the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling yet in a campaign finance case that challenges restrictions on corporate campaign spending before elections?
In the latest development in an ongoing investigation of the alleged $1.2 billion Ponzi scheme that disbarred attorney Scott Rothstein is accused of masterminding, federal authorities are now reportedly probing…
Today the U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to issue its first opinion following oral arguments this term, tying two other terms in the postwar era for the longest period without…
The law firm of Michigan trial lawyer Geoffrey Fieger will pay $131,000 to resolve a probe by the Federal Election Commission, an amount that pales in comparison…
Only one legal group in California is suing to enforce the state’s unique voting rights law. And a key attorney in that group helped draft it and get it enacted.
The U.S. Supreme Court appears ready to strike down or curtail restrictions on campaign spending by corporations, according to several reports on today’s oral arguments.
The lawyer arguing the campaign finance case involving the banned broadcast of the documentary, Hillary: the Movie, previews his arguments in a newspaper column.