Headline Of The Day

This will be interesting. Details. (Tipped by JMG reader David)

SCOTUS: Same-Sex Marriage Opponents Must Reveal Names Of Their Donors

Via the Associated Press:

The Supreme Court has turned away an appeal from same-sex marriage opponents in California who want to keep the identities of their campaign donors secret. The justices on Monday let stand a lower court ruling against ProtectMarriage.com, the National Organization for Marriage and other supporters of a 2008 ballot initiative that outlawed same-sex marriages in California until the ban was overturned five years later. The groups sought to conceal their past and future campaign finance records because they feared harassment of donors. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against them in part because the names have been publicly available for five years. State law requires political committees to identify those who contribute more than $100 during or after a campaign, along with the donor's address, occupation and employer.

Lawlessness! Judicial activism!

NOM Is Late With Donor Disclosures

Via press release from the Human Rights Campaign:

The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) has refused to make its 2013 Form 990s publicly available following their November 17 deadline – a direct violation of federal law. The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) first made an in-person request for the public financial documents on Monday morning and again on Tuesday – both times NOM was unable to produce the documents. Federal law requires organizations to publicly release their 990s the same day an in-person request is made. As a result, HRC is filing a complaint with the IRS in order to compel NOM to abide by the law.

“NOM has once again failed to meet one of the most basic standards for public accountability for any nonprofit organization, and it raises serious questions as to what in the world is going on,” said Fred Sainz, HRC’s Vice President for Communications & Marketing. “Are they simply demonstrating the same flagrant disregard that they did in Maine with state campaign finance laws? Are they attempting to hide something from the public in these documents that reflects even more poorly on the organization and their failed work? NOM should do the right thing and immediately release these financial documents that the public has a right to see.”

This isn’t the first time that NOM has run into trouble with public disclosure laws. Earlier this year, the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices voted unanimously to impose record civil penalties against NOM totaling $50,250. The Commission also directed NOM to file disclosure reports after a four-year investigation exposed “a significant violation of law” by the national anti-LGBT organization. The penalties are reportedly the largest ever imposed for a campaign finance violation in Maine history.

Meanwhile Brian Brown is at the Vatican attending yet another anti-gay convention.

Ted Cruz: Democrats Want To Outlaw SNL

Via Deadline:

A new proposal for campaign finance reform would make Saturday Night Live’s political skits illegal, Republican Sen. Ted Cruz has warned. The Senate is debating a bill that would add a constitutional amendment allowing Congress reverse a 2010 Supreme Court decision and restore limits on corporate campaign spending. Republicans say the bill, proposed by Dems, is an attack on free speech. Cruz, however, went one step further and connected the dots to NBC’s late-night sketch comedy show, and its exec producer Lorne Michaels. “Lorne Michaels could be put in jail under this amendment for making fun of any politician. That is extremely dangerous,” Cruz argued yesterday afternoon — tossing in a Dana Carvey impression to drive home his point. That’s because, Cruz insisted, the bill would give congress the “constitutional authority to prohibit” corporations “from engaging in political speech” and, “NBC, which airs Saturday Night Live, is a corporation.”

MAINE: Ethics Commission Extends Deadline For NOM To Disclose Donors

Via the Bangor Daily News:

The Maine Ethics Commission gave the National Organization for Marriage a reprieve Wednesday on disclosing the donor list from its 2009 campaign against same-sex marriage in Maine. But the five-person commission did not back down on its demand for the national organization to pay a $50,250 fine for violating the state’s campaign finance and disclosure laws.

Jonathan Wayne, the commission’s executive director, said Wednesday the commission unanimously approved a temporary delay on the disclosure of the national organization’s donors because the group has pledged to take its case to the Maine Superior Court, which would likely allow NOM to keep its donor list private while the case is active. The vote to uphold the fine was also unanimous.

Meanwhile, according to Wayne, NOM has filed complaints against two other national groups, the Human Rights Campaign and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, which supported same-sex marriage in Maine in 2009, for either not registering as political action committees or not disclosing donors. Those complaints will be considered by the commission at its July 31 meeting.

(Tipped by JMG reader Seth)

MAINE: NOM Files Campaign Finance Complaints Against HRC And Task Force

Via the Portland Press Herald:

The National Organization for Marriage, the nation’s leading opponent of gay marriage, has filed two retaliatory complaints claiming that its adversaries violated Maine election laws more than four years ago. The complaints against the Human Rights Campaign and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force stem from campaign activity in the 2009 referendum over Maine’s legislatively enacted gay-marriage law, which voters overturned. They are a direct response to a decision May 28 by Maine’s ethics commission to fine the organization a record $52,250 for failing to register as a ballot question committee and keeping its donors and activities secret during the 2009 campaign.  Fred Sainz, a spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign, said the anti-gay marriage group’s “nuisance complaint” further illustrates that it operated illegally while his organization followed disclosure laws. John Eastman, board chairman for the National Organization for Marriage, promised to file complaints against his opponents immediately after the five-member Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices accepted findings from a staff investigation that the organization violated Maine law.

(Tipped by JMG reader Tom)

NOM Has The Money Laundering Sadz

"NOM vigorously denies that it violated any disclosure laws during the 2009 campaign opposing same-sex marriage. We worked with legal counsel to understand the law, and we followed that advice. The Commission staff has drawn improper inferences from the circumstances of the campaign environment that they wrongly interpret as meaning that if someone gave to NOM somehow they designated their gift to support the Maine campaign. However, we have submitted direct sworn statements from donors saying they had no such intention and any inference from the Commission staff to the contrary is false. We intend to appeal this decision in court because it is wrong as a matter of law and because the evidence supports our position, not that of the Commission staff.

"Moreover, we appear to be a victim of selective prosecution since major groups on the other side of this same campaign engaged in the same approach we did. In short, while we are disappointed in today's decision, we are not surprised by it and we will continue to resist the idea that somehow we failed to disclose donors to the Maine campaign. We disclosed our contributions to the Maine campaign committee, as Maine law requires. But we did not disclose our entire national donor list because those donors did not donate 'for the purpose of influencing' the Maine campaign, which is the trigger for reporting contributions that Maine law imposes." - Hate group leader Brian Brown, via press release.

RELATED: Earlier today an ethics committee ruled that NOM had violated Maine's campaign finance disclosure law and assessed the highest fine in state history.

MAINE: Ethics Committee Finds NOM Guilty, Eastman Says "We Won't Pay Fine"

UPDATE: The Portland Press Herald reports.

NOM executives, two of whom were present for the hearing, vowed to fight the ruling and protect the anonymity of the organization’s donors. John Eastman, the attorney and board chairman for NOM, said revealing the donors would put them at risk of threats and harassment while hindering the organization’s ability to raise money. Eastman said NOM would appeal Wednesday’s ruling. NOM’s resistance means that more time is likely to pass before the donors to the 2009 campaign are publicly identified. Chris Plante, NOM’s regional director, told the Portland Press Herald last week that the group will “do whatever it takes to defend this and protect our donors’ anonymity.”

Eastman says that NOM will file an ethics complaint against the HRC.

During occasionally heated exchanges, Eastman and Brown said NOM had been singled out by the commission. They argued that the Human Rights Campaign, a gay activist group, operated in the same manner during the 2009 referendum and the 2012 ballot initiative that legalized same-sex marriage in Maine. Eastman said NOM would file an ethics complaint against the Human Rights Campaign for its activities in the referendum battles. Fred Karger, a gay-rights activist from California, filed the complaint against NOM with the Maine ethics commission in 2009. Karger said NOM effectively laundered its donations to conceal the identity of its donors. “NOM definitely picked the wrong state to break the law,” Karger said. Karger said the ruling could assist an investigation that he filed in Iowa in 2013. He is also considering filing another complaint in New Hampshire, where NOM attempted to repeal that state’s same-sex marriage law.

Editorial Of The Day

From the Bangor Daily News:

The results of the commission’s investigation might seem irrelevant now, given that five years have passed — because the commission faced two lawsuits from NOM, both of which NOM lost — and the issue of same-sex marriage is largely settled in Maine. But the principle remains, and the precedent is important. It’s quite likely the state will encounter another organization seeking to hide its major donors one day, and it should be ready.

The point of disclosing donors is not to shame them or harm an organization’s chance of fundraising. Many donors were named on campaign finance reporting forms filed by both sides. The bottom line is Maine residents deserve to know who’s trying to influence their vote. If the commission agrees at its May 28 meeting to impose a fine and require NOM to reveal its donors, it will likely encounter continued resistance. But it’s a fight worth having.

The editorial notes that NOM gave over $2M to Stand For Marriage Maine. According to state law, groups that raise more than $5K for a ballot measure must reveal their donors.

NOM Loses Again, Ninth Circuit Court Upholds Prop 8 Donor Disclosure Law

NOM has lost again. In a 2-1 decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the California law which requires that names of donors to public ballot measures be made public.

Sponsors of Proposition 8, the now-overturned initiative allowing only opposite-sex couples to marry in the state, complied with the disclosure law during the 2008 campaign and said some of their donors were targeted for threats and harassment. After unsuccessfully challenging the disclosure requirements, they sought to require the state to remove the names from its website and exempt them from the law in any future campaigns on related issues. But the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said the disclosure law has long been established as a constitutional measure to inform the public about campaign financing, and the current suit is pointless because the donors' names are publicly known.

The dissenting judge said that the court could consider future requests for exemption from the law based on the claims of harassment made by NOM and Protect Marriage.

The Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence's [and NOM chairman] John Eastman represented the plaintiffs. He said in an interview on Tuesday that he was actually encouraged by the ruling because it did not deny the groups' claims on their merits. That bodes well for the groups' challenges to similar disclosure rules in other jurisdictions, Eastman added. "We've got people that have been shot at," he said. "We easily meet the Supreme Court's standard for exemption from disclosure laws, and this court seems to recognize that." Eastman cited the majority's finding that the case might have ended differently had the plaintiffs appealed the denial of a preliminary injunction in 2009 - before the challenged information was so widely disseminated. "I think the opinion strongly suggest that we would have prevailed on such an effort," Eastman said, adding that he may use the ruling in potential future challenges to gay-marriage ballot initiatives in "half a dozen other states."

(Tipped by JMG reader Steve)

HomoQuotable - Fred Karger

"After nearly five years of Brian Brown and his NOM fighting in court against the investigation that I got launched against them in Maine, the verdict is in and NOM is guilty of numerous counts of election fraud. Ten days after I filed my complaint against NOM in Maine back in 2009, I was subpoenaed by NOM's high-priced attorneys in a federal lawsuit they had filed against California election officials. It was NOM's retribution against me for taking them on in Maine ten days earlier. After over a year of having to personally fight back against NOM's subpoena and paying a lot of attorney fees, it's so great to see justice and fairness win out against the bullies and liars at NOM. It was all worth it! Hopefully we'll see more actions like this against NOM in Hawaii and Iowa where Brian Brown and his NOM are also being investigated by those state ethics' offices on sworn complaints that I personally filed." - 2012 GOP presidential candidate Fred Karger, via press release.

Freep This Maine Poll

Just below the fold on the right. (Tipped by JMG reader Greg)

NOM Has The Maine Sadz

"NOM strongly denies the findings of the staff report in Maine. We did not raise funds designated for the Maine campaign and fully complied with Maine law. The staff has ignored uncontested sworn evidence from donors that we did not designate any contributions for the referendum effort and instead has focused on circumstantial evidence to support its conclusion when a fair reading of those circumstances suggests the opposite. We look forward to presenting our case to the full Commission." - NOM chairman John Eastman, reacting to the Maine ethics investigators who have recommended that NOM be fined over $50K for "failing to register and disclose its activities in Maine’s 2009 same-sex marriage referendum."

MAINE: Ethics Investigators Recommend NOM Be Fined $50K For Cloaking Donors

Via the Bangor Daily News:

Maine ethics investigators are recommending more than $50,000 in fines for a national anti-gay-marriage organization for failing to register and disclose its activities in Maine’s 2009 same-sex marriage referendum. That year, an effort to legalize same-sex marriage — approved by the Legislature and signed by then-Gov. John Baldacci — was repealed at the ballot box with 53 percent of the vote. National Organization for Marriage was the largest contributor to the ’09 anti-gay-marriage campaign, and dumped roughly $2 million into the state. That money was integral in defeating the fledgling marriage equality law. The Maine Ethics Commission launched an investigation into NOM, alleging the group had violated Maine law by not registering as a ballot question committee and providing detailed reports about its fundraising and spending.

They'll never pay. (Tipped by JMG reader Seth)

TRAILER: Citizen Koch

Clip description:

In this searing exposé on the state of democracy in America and the fracturing of the Republican Party, Academy Award®-nominated directors Carl Deal and Tia Lessin (Trouble the Water; co-producers of Fahrenheit 9/11 & Bowling for Columbine) follow the money behind the rise of the Tea Party. CITIZEN KOCH investigates the impact of unlimited, anonymous spending by corporations and billionaires on the electoral process, featuring stories of life-long Republicans whose loyalty is tested when their families become collateral damage in the GOP fight to take organized labor out at the knees. Alternately terrifying and funny, CITIZEN KOCH is an essential and powerful portrait of our political times.

Mark Fiore: Sheldon Adelson's Menagerie

SCOTUS Rules That Limits On Total Campaign Donations Are Unconstitutional

The US Supreme Court today ruled that limits on total individual campaign donations are unconstitutional, effectively giving the nation's mega-wealthy even more power over election results. The ruling comes in the long-festering McCutcheon Vs Federal Elections Commission case.

The justices ruled 5-4, in a decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts, that limits on the total amount of money donors can give to all candidates, committees and political parties are unconstitutional. The decision frees the nation's wealthiest donors to have greater influence in federal elections. "The government has a strong interest, no less critical to our democratic system, in combatting corruption and its appearance," Roberts wrote. "We have, however, held that this interest must be limited to a specific kind of corruption — quid pro quo corruption — in order to ensure that the government's efforts do not have the effect of restricting the First Amendment right of citizens to choose who shall govern them."

The ruling is a victory for the Republican National Committee and Alabama coal tycoon Shawn McCutcheon (above), who challenged the $123,000 limit on total donations that an individual can give in any two-year federal election cycle.

McCutcheon's challenge did not extend to the $2,600 limit a donor can give to a federal candidate in each primary and general election or the $32,400 limit that can go to a national party committee, because of concerns about corruption that are at the root of the federal law. Under the court's ruling, donors will have to stick to that $2,600 limit but can give to as many campaigns as they want without worrying about the previous $123,200 ceiling. The decision also could jeopardize separate contribution caps in at least a dozen states, from Arizona to Wyoming.

Common Cause has denounced the ruling.

“Today’s decision in McCutcheon v FEC is Citizens United round two, further opening the floodgates for the nation’s wealthiest few to drown out the voices of the rest of us,” said Miles Rapoport, president of Common Cause. "The Court has reversed nearly 40 years of its own precedents, laid out a welcome mat for corruption, and turned its back on the lessons learned from the Watergate scandal,” said Rapoport. “This decision once again demonstrates the Court majority’s ignorance of the real world of American politics, the one in which big money buys big returns.”

Thanks to today’s decision, a politician will be able to solicit a $3.6 million check for party committees and federal candidates from a single donor, consigning to background noise the hundreds of millions of Americans who can’t afford to give more than $5, $10 or even $100 to parties or the candidates of their choice. “This is a return to the ‘soft money’ era, in which donors could hide six- and seven-figure gifts to individual candidates by donating the money to joint committees or party committees that simply passed it to the intended recipient, Rapoport said. “It’s naïve to think that such vast sums of political money do not buy special access and favors.”

Our new national motto: E Pluribus Billionaires.

Teabagger US Rep. Paul Broun Flees Reporter Asking About Campaign Finance

Tea Party hero Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) made headlines in 2012 when he declared that evolution is "a lie from the pit of hell" and that the earth is only 9000 years old. Today a reporter tried to ask Broun why he's paying Michele Bachmann's former top aide over $33K to train him in "rhetorical skills." Because when you want to speak intelligently, you go to the person that trained Crazy Eyes. Broun is running to move up the Senate and recently gave away an AR-15 rifle as a fundraising gimmick.

PREVIOUSLY ON JMG: Paul Broun calls for armed militias to revolt against the federal government. Paul Broun calls for Congress to declare it to be the "National Year Of The Bible."  Paul Broun says that President Obama is planning to create Gestapo-like force to impose a dictatorship.  Paul Broun authors a bill to block the sale of Playboy on military bases.

MINNESOTA: Pro-Marriage Legislators Are Seeing Larger Campaign Donations

Brian Brown repeatedly warns legislators that they will be punished for supporting same-sex marriage. That hasn't happened in Minnesota.

Minnesota legislators who took a political risk in voting in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage last year have posted big campaign finance hauls, according to reports made public Saturday. The House members whose 2013 votes were contrary to most in their party or their districts brought in double, triple or even quadruple the cash they raised in 2011, according to a Star Tribune analysis. While many members of the House brought in more cash in 2013 than they did in 2011, the legislators who are expected to be targeted this year because of their same-sex marriage support stand out. The hefty campaign coffers may prove particularly helpful if they face strong challengers or voter backlash. “It’s an incredibly strong statement by people who supported the freedom to marry,” said Richard Carlbom, a spokesman for Minnesota United, the group that fought the proposed 2012 constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage and lobbied last year for Minnesota to legalize those unions.

Bolding is mine.

GOP Rep. Michael Grimm (NY) Threatens Reporter: I Could Break You In Half

Earlier today Rep. Michael Grimm (R-NY made positive news when he became the sixth Republican member of the House to co-sponsor ENDA. Grimm's move won him accolades from openly gay Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO), the bill's author. But tonight Grimm dominated the post-SOTU Twitterverse for threatening to assault a NY1 reporter who dared to ask him about his burgeoning campaign finance scandal back home, which so far has resulted in the arrest of one of his fundraisers.

The Daily Beast recaps tonight's scene:

Congressman Michael Grimm threatened Michael Scotto, a reporter with NY1, a local New York television news station, after the State of the Union Tuesday night saying "you're not a man. I could break you in half." Scotto, was finishing an interview with Staten Island Republican Michael Grimm about the State of the Union when he decided to ask one more question. What that question was is unclear because Grimm immediately cut him off saying "I'm not speaking about anything that is off-topic. This is only about the President's speech." The reporter then spoke to the camera saying that he hoped to ask Grimm about the ongoing campaign finance investigation around his 2010 campaign. Grimm has been linked to an allegedly corrupt Israeli rabbi and his ex-girlfriend has been indicted on charges of being a straw donor among other controversies.

According to a NY1 producer, Grimm also said this: "Let me be clear to you, you ever do that to me again - I'll throw you off this fucking balcony." The poor kid looks really startled.

UPDATE: Grimm is not apologizing.