We at CFIF have repeatedly highlighted how the electric vehicle (EV) subsidy complex captures the American…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Congress Moves to Exacerbate the Unjustifiable Electric Vehicle Subsidy Monstrosity

We at CFIF have repeatedly highlighted how the electric vehicle (EV) subsidy complex captures the American public's most hated elements of bureaucracy:  crony capitalism, wasteful spending, inefficient incentives and government picking winners and losers.

Whatever novelty that EVs may offer, taxpayer dollars shouldn't be subsidizing them, and bureaucrats shouldn't be unjustifiably foisting them upon a perfectly healthy automobile marketplace.

Unfortunately, as Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) notes, the EV Industrial Subsidy Complex is now demanding even more:

Although wind and solar advocates continue to assure us that wind and solar are now cheaper than conventional power, the wind and solar lobbies don't agree.  They are back at the trough.  And the automakers…[more]

November 15, 2019 • 12:32 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 individuals attempted to assassinate President Ford in 1975?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"The clear loser of the Democratic primary is 'Medicare for All.'First, it demonstrated the unreliability of Kamala Harris out of the gate, when she endorsed it before quickly backing off. Now, it has blunted the momentum of Elizabeth Warren, made a mockery of her claim to be an uber-wonk and shredded her implicit appeal to Bernie Sanders supporters as an equally committed left-winger without the…[more]
 
 
—Rich Lowry, National Review Editor
— Rich Lowry, National Review Editor
 
Liberty Poll   

What is the most important news story of the week?