Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
The Indiana Supreme Court will hear oral arguments this fall on the issue of whether state law prohibits or otherwise limits corporate contributions to political action committees or other entities that engage in independent campaign-related expenditures.
The high court has scheduled 40 minutes for oral arguments beginning at 9 a.m. Sept. 7 in Indiana Right to Life Victory Fund and Sarkes Tarzian, Inc. v. Diego Morales, et al., 23S-CQ-00108.
The case comes to the justices via a certified question from the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals: “Does the Indiana Election Code — in particular, §§ 5-9-2-3 to -6 — prohibit or otherwise limit corporate contributions to PACs or other entities that engage in independent campaign-related expenditures?”
The case involves Indiana Right to Life Victory Fund, which wants to operate as an independent-expenditure PAC — commonly called a super PAC — in Indiana but fears that the state’s election laws won’t allow it to accept donations from corporations, or that there would be a cap on how much those corporations could donate.
The group says that would be a violation of its First Amendment rights, so it and a private company, Sarkes Tarzian Inc., went to federal court to stop Indiana from enforcing its campaign-finance laws to limit or ban corporate contributions to super PACs.
Sarkes, an Indiana-based TV and radio company, wants to make a $10,000 contribution to Indiana Right to Life Victory Fund, according to court documents.
But Indiana election officials have said that they have no intent of enforcing the laws in that way, and that doing so would be a violation of the First Amendment. Thus, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana dismissed the lawsuit for lack of standing, finding the fund did not allege a credible threat.
The fund and Sarkes then appealed, and the 7th Circuit in April submitted its certified question to the state Supreme Court.
“On the one hand, Indiana’s Election Code may not even regulate the Fund’s desired conduct, meaning the Fund would face no credible threat of an injury. But resolving this question would require us to interpret an Indiana state statute where both sides have advanced credible positions,” the 7th Circuit wrote. “On the other hand, Indiana officials say they will not enforce the Election Code in the way that concerns the Fund.”
The appellate court also noted the U.S. Supreme Court has instructed federal courts to ensure that any conflict between state law and the First Amendment is not “purely hypothetical.”
“To that end, when we are faced with both statutory and constitutional questions, we must prioritize resolving the statutory issues if doing so would prevent us from engaging in unnecessary constitutional analysis,” the 7th Circuit wrote.
Principal briefs are due in the Indiana Supreme Court by Tuesday, and each side will be allowed to file one response brief by July 17. Amici briefs must also be filed by July 17, and those wishing to file an amicus brief must file a motion and proposed brief by Tuesday.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.