Using the same BCRA procedure by which the Supreme Court heard Citizens United v. FEC, the CCP legal team argued that the US District Court committed two major errors in dismissing James’s case: First, it claimed that there is no overall aggregate limit on campaign contributions. As noted in the appeal, “This holding is contrary to the plain language of BCRA, the FEC’s regulations implementing that Act, and the legislative history of BCRA itself.” Second, the court held, “for the first time and without referencing any authority, that contributions directly to candidate committees pose the same risk of circumvention as do much larger contributions to PACs and, especially, party committees.”
The appeal can be found here.
