[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 132 (Monday, July 10, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42365-42366]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-17328]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

[Notice 2000-14]


Status of Civil Enforcement Actions Involving Coordinated Party 
Expenditures

AGENCY:  Federal Election Commission.

ACTION:  Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY:  The Commission has adopted a policy statement that provides 
guidance to candidates and political party committees on the status of 
certain civil enforcement actions under the Federal Election Campaign 
Act pending Supreme Court resolution of the issues presented in the 
Tenth Circuit's decision in FEC v. Colorado Republican Federal Campaign 
Committee.

DATES:  June 20, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Louise Wides, Assistant Staff 
Director,

[[Page 42366]]

999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 20463, (202) 694-1100 or (800) 424-
9530.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  In a split decision, the United States 
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit recently held that 2 U.S.C. 
441a(d)(3), which limits the amount of a political party's coordinated 
expenditures in congressional elections, violates the First Amendment. 
FEC v. Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee, __F.3d __, 2000 
WL 554688 (10th Cir. May 5, 2000). The Solicitor General has decided to 
seek review of that decision by the United States Supreme Court. Until 
the Supreme Court resolves the case, the Federal Election Commission 
will not file any action in the courts in the Tenth Circuit to enforce 
section 441a(d)(3). The Commission will, however, generally continue 
the administrative processing of matters concerning section 441a(d)(3).
    Only the Tenth Circuit has found section 441a(d)(3) 
unconstitutional, and its decision is not controlling outside that 
court's geographic jurisdiction. Furthermore, if the United States 
Supreme Court overrules the Tenth Circuit, the Court's decision 
upholding section 441a(d)(3) will apply retroactively to any activities 
in the interim that violate section 441a(d)(3), even in the Tenth 
Circuit. See James B. Beam Distilling Co. v. Georgia, 501 U.S. 529 
(1991); Harper v. Virginia Dep't of Taxation, 509 U.S. 86 (1993). 
Therefore, anyone who chooses to act in contravention of section 
441a(d)(3)--within or without the Tenth Circuit--before the Supreme 
Court rules in Colorado could be subject to liability for violating the 
statute if the Colorado decision is reversed.

    Dated: July 5, 2000.
Darryl R. Wold,
Chairman, Federal Election Commission.
[FR Doc. 00-17328 Filed 7-7-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-P