Sandler Reiff Young & Lamb has been one of the go-to sources over the past few days as journalists have reported and analyzed the Supreme Court’s decision in McCutcheon v. FEC. Below are just some of the stories where attorneys at SRYL have provided their expertise:
- David Mitrani told the Center for Public Integrity that since the Supreme Court ruled that aggregate contribution limits are unconsititutional, it is unlikely that similar aggregate limits in twelve states and the District of Columbia will continue to stand.
- David Mitrani gave a similar statement to WAMU.
- David Mitrani also helped Mother Jones break down the aforementioned aggregate limits at the state level.
- Neil Reiff told Campaigns and Elections that party committees are one of the big winners in the aftermath of McCutcheon: “If an individual wants to triple max each year to the three national committees, that is $194,400 for the two-year cycle, way more than the aggregate limit.”
- Neil Reiff reminded Bloomberg that while someone could theoretically create a “Super-Joint Fundraising Committee,” in order to write one check that is distributed among dozens of candidates, they could likely still get more bang for their buck by contributing to a Super PAC.
- Late yesterday, David Mitrani told Reuters that campaign officials in Maryland and Massachusetts had already stopped enforcing aggregate contribution limits, a little more than 24-hours after the McCutcheon decision was handed down.
- Finally, Neil Reiff told the Wall Street Journal that while Democratic lawmakers generally prefer more restrictions on money in elections, party strategists will welcome the loss of federal aggregate contribution limits.