Featured Content

2016 Online Ad Spending in Perspective

The use of online advertisements by Russia to meddle in the 2016 campaign has featured heavily in the news. Those in favor of more regulation would have you believe that the problem is great enough to necessitate government intervention. Check out this infographic to see just how expansive these ads were.

Filed Under: Featured Content

2016 Election Spending vs. Consumer Spending

A common refrain from proponents of greater speech regulation is that Americans spend “too much money on politics.” In the 2016 election cycle, “too much money” amounted to $6.4 billion. That may sound like a lot, but when compared to consumer spending on a variety of frivolous or non-essential goods, the amount Americans spend speaking about candidates and elections pales significantly in comparison. Check out the Institute for Free Speech’s newest infographic.

Filed Under: Featured Content

Does Money Buy Elections? According to Alabama, Evidently Not.

Proponents of greater speech regulation often argue that candidates and groups who spend more money on elections have an unfair advantage, and, therefore, that we need more limits on political spending. But can money really buy an election? Check out the Institute for Free Speech’s newest infographic on the 2017 Alabama special primary and runoff […]

Filed Under: Blog, Featured Content, Issues, Money in Politics, Alabama Special Election, Luther Strange, Political Spending, Roy Moore, Alabama

Amicus Brief: Trump v. International Refugee Assistance Project

Filed Under: Featured Content

Amicus Brief: Minnesota Voters Alliance, et al. v. Joe Mansky, et al.

Filed Under: Featured Content

Amicus Brief: Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance v. Judge Gay Polk-Payton

Filed Under: Featured Content

Amicus Brief: In re Stephen M. Silberstein

On behalf of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Sen. Thad Cochran, Sen. John Boozman, and Sen. Richard Shelby, CCP (now IFS) filed this friend-of-the-court brief opposing a petition for a Writ of Mandamus filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit by Stephen M. Silberstein. Mr. Silberstein sought the writ to force the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to engage in a rulemaking that would mandate corporate disclosure of otherwise-immaterial contributions to political organizations and industry groups. The Senators’ brief noted that such a rulemaking would directly violate the recent omnibus appropriations bill, which should be interpreted as preventing the SEC from regulating in that area. Two days after the filing of this amicus brief, Mr. Silberstein withdrew his petition.

Filed Under: All Amicus Briefs, Blog, Current Amicus Briefs, Featured Content

Petition for Writ of Certiorari with U.S. Supreme Court in DSF v. Denn

Filed Under: Featured Content

PR Firms Sue NY on New Lobbying Rule

Alexandria, VA – The Center for Competitive Politics (CCP), America’s largest nonprofit working to promote and defend First Amendment rights to free political speech, assembly, and petition announced that five public relations firms filed a lawsuit in federal court today seeking to block a new lobbying rule by the New York State Joint Commission on […]

Filed Under: Blog, Featured Content, November Team v. JCOPE, Press Releases, November Team v. JCOPE

Federal Appeals Court Rules Colorado Disclosure Law Unconstitutional

Denver, CO – A federal appeals court unanimously affirmed a lower court decision declaring that Colorado’s ballot issue disclosure law violates the First Amendment for groups raising or spending less than $3,500. The decision was handed down late Wednesday by three judges nominated by President Barack Obama to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in the […]

Filed Under: Blog, Coalition for Secular Government v. Gessler Other Links, CSG v. Gessler, Featured Content, Press Releases, Coalition for Secular Government, Colorado

The Center for Competitive Politics is now the Institute for Free Speech.