McConnell v. Federal Election Commission

E669893

McConnell v. Federal Election Commission is a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case that largely upheld the constitutionality of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (McCain–Feingold Act), significantly shaping modern campaign finance law.

All labels observed (4)

How this entity was disambiguated

Statements (49)

Predicate Object
instanceOf United States Supreme Court case
campaign finance case
constitutional law case
hasAlternativeName McConnell v. FEC
McConnell v. Federal Election Comm’n
hasAreaOfLaw First Amendment law
campaign finance law
hasArguedDate September 8, 2003
hasChiefJustice William H. Rehnquist
hasCitation 540 U.S. 93
hasConstitutionalProvisionAtIssue Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
hasCountry United States
hasCourt Supreme Court of the United States
hasDecisionDate December 10, 2003
hasDissentingJustice Anthony M. Kennedy
Antonin Scalia
Clarence Thomas
Sandra Day O’Connor
Stephen G. Breyer
William H. Rehnquist
hasDocketNumber 02-1674
02-1675
hasFullCaseName Mitch McConnell, United States Senator, et al. v. Federal Election Commission et al.
hasImpactOn modern U.S. campaign finance regime
regulation of electioneering communications
regulation of soft money in federal elections
hasJoinedMajority David H. Souter
John Paul Stevens
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Sandra Day O’Connor
Stephen G. Breyer
hasMajorityOpinionBy John Paul Stevens
Sandra Day O’Connor
hasPetitioner Mitch McConnell
National Rifle Association
hasRearguedDate September 9, 2003
hasRespondent Federal Election Commission
United States
hasStatuteAtIssue Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002
held that many disclosure and reporting requirements in the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act are constitutional
that restrictions on soft money contributions to national political parties are constitutional
isRelatedCase Buckley v. Valeo
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. v. Federal Election Commission
limitedOverruledBy Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. v. Federal Election Commission
upheldConstitutionalityOf Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act electioneering communications provisions
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act soft money ban

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (8)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce relatedCase McConnell v. Federal Election Commission
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act challengedInCase McConnell v. Federal Election Commission
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act upheldInPartBy McConnell v. Federal Election Commission
United States federal campaign finance law shapedBy McConnell v. Federal Election Commission
Paul Clement notableCase McConnell v. FEC
linked to: McConnell v. Federal Election Commission
McConnell v. Federal Election Commission hasFullCaseName Mitch McConnell, United States Senator, et al. v. Federal Election Commission et al.
linked to: McConnell v. Federal Election Commission
McConnell v. Federal Election Commission hasAlternativeName McConnell v. FEC
linked to: McConnell v. Federal Election Commission
McConnell v. Federal Election Commission hasAlternativeName McConnell v. Federal Election Comm’n
linked to: McConnell v. Federal Election Commission