On behalf of over 300,000 of our supporters and activists across the nation, CFIF has written the following…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
CFIF to U.S. Senate: On Drug Prices, Say "NO" to Mandatory Inflation Rebate Proposals

On behalf of over 300,000 of our supporters and activists across the nation, CFIF has written the following letter opposing any use of Mandatory Inflation Rebate Proposals when it comes to the issue of addressing drug prices:

We believe that market-oriented solutions offer the optimal solution, and resolutely oppose any use of mandatory inflation rebate proposals – which would unfairly penalize a drug’s manufacturer with higher taxes whenever that drug’s price rises faster than inflation - that will make matters worse, not better. Among other defects, such a government-imposed penalty would undermine Medicare Part D’s current structure, which uses market-based competition to mitigate drug costs. Part D currently works via privately-negotiated rebates, meaning that no specific price…[more]

July 15, 2019 • 02:48 pm

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Home Press Room Center for Individual Freedom Files Federal Lawsuit Challenging Constitutionality of Illinois' Campaign Finance Law
Center for Individual Freedom Files Federal Lawsuit Challenging Constitutionality of Illinois' Campaign Finance Law Print
Wednesday, July 14 2010

Vagueness of Illinois law and its discriminatory exemption for labor unions violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments

ALEXANDRIA, VA — The Center for Individual Freedom (“CFIF”) today filed a lawsuit asking a federal court to strike down as unconstitutional certain provisions of Illinois campaign finance law that forbid independent issue ads and other speech during election periods unless CFIF and all other similarly-situated organizations – except labor unions – abide by onerous and constitutionally-suspect reporting and disclosure requirements. 

CFIF filed its complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, charging that the Illinois law in question is vague and overbroad, and thus violates its free speech and association rights guaranteed by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  In addition, CFIF argues that Illinois’ exemption for labor unions violates both the First Amendment and the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

“CFIF wishes to broadcast ads and use other media to speak on public policy issues in Illinois during the weeks leading up to the November elections,” said CFIF President Jeffrey Mazzella.  “But the vagueness of Illinois law and the threat of civil and criminal penalties force us to remain mute.  We have no other option than to seek vindication of our First Amendment rights in the courts.”

Referring to Illinois’ exemption for labor unions, Mazzella stated, “One of the only clear and precise details in the Illinois campaign finance statute is that it specifically exempts labor unions and only labor unions.  Such statutory discrimination in favor of labor unions and their views, and seemingly against all others, is one type of legal favoritism the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment seeks to prevent.  Core First Amendment rights must be protected for all similarly situated speakers, not just for one politically favored group. 

“That basic constitutional principle of fairness is not only being ignored in Illinois,” Mazzella added.  Similar statutory discrimination in favor of labor unions and a small handful of other groups is reportedly being contemplated on the federal level by Congress as part of the so-called DISCLOSE Act.

CFIF has a long history of speaking out on public policy issues, as well as vindicating its rights in the courts when unconstitutional laws stand in its way.  CFIF has prevailed in challenging campaign finance statutes that, as is currently the case in Illinois, were unconstitutionally vague and overbroad in Louisiana and Pennsylvania in 2006 and 2007, respectively.   In 2008, CFIF also won an injunction against enforcement of certain provisions of West Virginia’s campaign finance statute.

In Illinois, CFIF seeks a prompt hearing and all remedies that will effectively protect it and others who wish to speak freely in the state in the months and weeks leading up to elections, as well as attorneys fees and costs.  CFIF’s complaint names Illinois Attorney General Lisa M. Madigan and each Member of the Illinois State Board of Elections as defendants.

The United States Supreme Court already has twice struck down Illinois laws discriminating in favor of speech by labor unions.

CFIF is represented by Thomas W. Kirby and Caleb P. Burns of the Washington, D.C. firm Wiley Rein LLP, and Steven F. Pflaum and Meredith D. Schacht of Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP in Chicago.

To read CFIF’s Complaint, click here (.pdf)

Read CFIF's Memorandum in Support of the Motion for a Preliminary and Permanent Injuction here (.pdf).

###
 

Question of the Week   
Which one of the following was the longest-serving U.S. Secretary of State?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"[A]s ICE prepared to conduct a nationwide operation, Democratic leaders such as Nancy Pelosi held a press conference to instruct those who have violated our nation's laws on how they can evade federal law enforcement. How they can evade the law. How what ICE is doing is un-American and they need to resist.Are you kidding me?The Speaker of the House, a lawmaker for decades, is instructing those who…[more]
 
 
—Thomas Homan, Former Acting Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
— Thomas Homan, Former Acting Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
 
Liberty Poll   

Do the "politics of personal destruction," now rampant across the political spectrum and amplified by the media, make you more or less inclined to personally participate in political activity?