New: Sen. Ted Cruz has won his lawsuit challenging a campaign finance law that caps the amount of post-election contributions that can be used to repay personal loans to a campaign at $250K assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2079…
A special three-judge panel was appointed, since it involves campaign finance law. Unanimous decision for Cruz from an ideologically diverse group: DC Circuit Judge Neomi Rao (Trump appointee) + US District Judges Amit Mehta (Obama appointee) and Timothy Kelly (Trump appointee)
The panel concluded the govt failed to show the cap was narrowly tailored to prevent quid pro quo corruption.
Rao wrote the opinion: "We find that the loan-repayment limit burdens political speech and thus implicates the protection of the First Amendment."
Cruz sued because he loaned his 2018 Senate reelection campaign $260K, and his campaign used $250K in post-election contributions to repay that, right up to the cap. Cruz argued the cap violated his 1A rights as well as those of supporters who wanted to contribute post-election
"A candidate’s loan to his campaign is an expenditure that may be used for expressive acts. Such expressive acts are burdened when a candidate is inhibited from making a personal loan, or incurring one, out of concern that she will be left holding the bag on any unpaid ... debt"
As for the FEC's argument that allowing post-election contributions to repay a candidate's personal loans w/out limit ups the risk of corruption, court noted the FEC didn't present documented examples of that happening, and was unpersuaded by academic research on the subject
"...the FEC’s asserted rationale boils down to a general concern about money in politics and campaign contributions to incumbents—but such general concerns about influence or access cannot justify government regulation in the vital area of political speech."
In summation
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Hello again from virtual court, this time before Mag. Judge Harvey in the case of J6 defendant Anthime Gionet, who prosecutors have also accused of running afoul of his pretrial release conditions. See:
Gionet's atty filed a response disputing he'd violated any release condition, saying he needs to make videos for the web to earn a living, and calling probation's request for stricter conditions "asinine" assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2079…
(Disclosure again that Gionet is a former BuzzFeed employee, also known by the nickname "Baked Alaska")
Hello from Judge McFadden's virtual courtroom, where a hearing is set to begin soon on J6 defendant Brandon Fellows, who is accused, for a second time, of violating some of his pretrial release conditions. More here:
Meanwhile, DOJ has sent out a fact sheet in advance of tomorrow, which marks 150 days since the Jan. 6 riots. Highlights:
~465 people arrested from nearly every state + DC
~130 people charged with assaulting/interfering with police
~200 charged w/ obstructing official proceeding
Back to the Brandon Fellows hearing: Judge is asking about his mental health, and whether there are issues there that are behind his compliance problems. Probation officer is recc'ing at least an eval; AUSA argues he continues to disregard the "privilege" the court has given him
Today in non-J6 legal news: There was a hearing re: John Hinckley, the man who tried to assassinate Ronald Reagan (and was found not guilty by reason of insanity.)
Hinckley has been out of the hospital since 2016, and his lawyer will soon be arguing for unconditional release
Hinckley's lawyer Barry Levine suggested an evidentiary hearing isn't even necessary, since the mental health professionals working with Hinckley have recc'd full release, but the govt wants a full hearing.
Something of a ~situation~ has come up in Dems' civil lawsuit over Jan. 6 — they're claiming Rep. Mo Brooks, one of the defendants, is making it hard to serve him with the suit and won't waive formal service like Trump, Trump Jr., and Giuliani did assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2079…
So the plaintiffs asked the judge for more time (there's a deadline to serve a defendant with a complaint once you sue them) and for the judge to step in and have the US Marshals Service or some other entity help get this done
Tonight, the judge agreed to give Dems more time to serve Brooks (who is, a reminder, their collegue in the House), but won't order the US Marshals to get involved because of "separation of powers concerns"
Hodgkins will be pleading guilty to the most serious count he was indicted on, obstruction of an official proceeding (indictment: assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2050…) and the remaining misdemeanors for illegally entering the Capitol will be dismissed
Dialed in too late to hear this, apparently we have some special guests on the line as well
NEW: An assistant US attorney sexually harassed women across the federal government, according to a newly obtained inspector general report — the report details physical and verbal harassment of an intern, FBI analyst, another AUSA, and a postal inspector buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetil…
The DOJ inspector general's office announced the conclusion of this investigation in November, but shared little information. The full (albeit heavily redacted) 11-page report includes lots of new details about the misconduct substantiated by investigators buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetil…
The inspector general's office redacted the AUSA's name, citing privacy exemptions to FOIA. It's the latest in a string of reports about substantiated harassment and misconduct complaints at DOJ where the subject's name is kept under seal buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetil…