Prompts winter weather advisories as cold air moves in Friday night

MPR News helps you turn down the noise and build shared understanding. Turn up your support for this public resource and keep trusted journalism accessible to all. 

Turn Up Your Support

A federal judge has declared that
Minnesota's restrictions on independent expenditures on behalf of
political candidates by corporations are unconstitutional.

      U.S. District Judge Paul Magnuson issued the ruling Friday in a
lawsuit filed by the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce.

      The Chamber sued to assert its rights following a U.S. Supreme
Court decision in January that struck down similar restrictions on
the federal level.


Mike Franklin with the Minnesota Chamber says businesses want to be sure the law is clear as the campaign gets underway. 


"It's not as if we had a plan just ready to go after this decision came down. We'll have to sit down and talk about a way to now participate in a responsible, independent campaign," said Franklin. "This election is going to be one of great consequence for businesses in Minnesota, so that'll be the next step trying to figure out what that looks like."


Common Cause Minnesota issued a statement saying it's concerned about what will happen in the upcoming election cycle, and asking for the Legislature to require greater disclosure of political expenditures and contributions. 


"Without legislative action, the court's decision will create a wild west of corporate spending in political campaigns," said Mike Dean, executive director of Common Cause Minnesota. "The Legislature must act to prevent the chaos caused by this decision."


If the Legislature fails to act this session, the group predicts there will be a series of lawsuits filed that will cause more confusion around 
Minnesota's campaign finance rules. 


  
During a hearing Judge Magnuson held on the case last month, Chamber attorney Thomas Boyd argued the law chills the business advocacy group and its members from exercising their free speech rights out of fear of penalties that include heavy fines, possible imprisonment and even
dissolution of corporations.


Ramsey County Attorney Susan Gaertner had already said she wouldn't prosecute the Chamber for the kind of political activities it said it wants to
pursue. 


But Assistant Ramsey County Attorney Kevin Lindsey urged the judge not to declare the statutes unconstitutional, saying they regulate activities beyond those deemed protected speech under the Supreme Court ruling.


Boyd said it wasn't good enough that Gaertner, who isn't running for re-election this fall, pledged not to prosecute the Chamber. He
said prosecutors in other counties might decide otherwise.

      "The current county attorney cannot bind her successors. ...
This county attorney cannot bind all of the other county
attorneys," he said.

      The legal language at issue prohibits corporations from making
independent expenditures to promote or defeat political candidates,
or directly or indirectly to political parties for the same
purposes. Independent expenditures are defined as spending not
coordinated or approved by the candidates.

 During the hearing, Judge Magnuson raised the hypothetical possibility that some prosecutor could
seek to draw headlines by calling for the dissolution of a big
company such as Medtronic for its political spending.

      "Like it or not, county attorneys are elected positions, and
while maybe nonpartisan in a sense, they are political," Magnuson
said.

      The Chamber is not seeking the right to make direct
contributions to candidates. But it says it specifically wants the
freedom to spend in support of candidates by taking out print, TV,
Internet and billboard ads; posting endorsements on its website,
using its blog to post messages of support; sending letters to
local businesses in support of candidates; holding rallies and
setting up phone banks.

      "They are well within their rights to do so," Lindsey said.

      But Boyd said Gaertner's pledge not to prosecute might not apply
to some newer forms of campaigning that the Chamber didn't list in
its briefs, such as social media, that it or other groups and
corporations might someday decide to use.

      The U.S. Supreme Court's decision, handed down in January in a
major case known as Citizens United, threatened spending
restrictions in effect in some 24 states at the time.

      Based on that ruling, a federal judge in California in February
ordered San Diego to drop its city election contribution limits.
And last month the Republican Party asked the U.S. Supreme Court
to take a step further and allow parties to raise unlimited
contributions from corporations, unions and others.

      The Chamber named Gaertner in its lawsuit because the group is
headquartered in St. Paul, so the Ramsey County attorney's office
likely would be responsible for prosecuting it.
  

Gallery

Minnesota businesses prepare for new political spending rules

Crime, Law and Justice

Politics and Government News

A federal judge has declared that
Minnesota's restrictions on independent expenditures on behalf of
political candidates by corporations are unconstitutional.


Judge voids some Minn. campaign spending rules

Go Deeper.

Like this?