ACLU-CT Files Federal Lawsuit Challenging State Campaign Finance Law

HARTFORD, CT - The ACLU Foundation of Connecticut today filed a lawsuit in federal court in Hartford challenging the state's new campaign finance law, saying that several provisions of the law violate the freedoms of speech and association under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The suit names Jeffrey Garfield, Executive Director of the state Elections Enforcement Commission, and State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal as defendants and seeks to block them from enforcing those provisions.

"For more than 17 years, the ACLU has supported public financing for political campaigns as a means of facilitating the candidacy of individuals from diverse socio-economic and political backgrounds. At the same time, however, we have been concerned that election campaign reforms be achieved by means that do not sacrifice basic civil liberties," said Roger C. Vann, Executive Director of ACLU-CT. He added, "We believe that Connecticut's campaign finance law crosses that line. For the sake of political expediency, the General Assembly passed and the Governor signed deeply flawed legislation that plays fast and loose with the constitutional rights of both candidates and their supporters."

The campaign law, which was passed in December of 2005 and amended this past June, establishes a system of public financing for campaigns for state Constitutional and General Assembly offices. "In order for the public financing of campaigns to be fair, funds must be equally available in equal amounts to all qualified candidates who are able to objectively demonstrate support for their candidacies, said Renee C. Redman, ACLUF-CT Legal Director and co-counsel in the lawsuit. "Connecticut's law doesn't meet that standard because it effectively excludes minor party candidates from receiving public financing. Minor party candidates are compelled to demonstrate support not only through onerous financial requirements but also through prior election activity. This goes far beyond an objective showing of support," added Redman.

"The Connecticut legislators who drafted this law in the dead of night knew that they were creating a system that would perpetuate two classes of political parties that are separate and unequal," said plaintiff S. Michael Derosa, co-chair of the Green Party of Connecticut and the party's current candidate for Secretary of the State. He added, "We consider this law an act of blatant discrimination against third party and independent candidacies."

The law also bars contributions by lobbyists, state contractors, and their immediate family members. Certain employees, officers and directors of current and prospective state contractors are also barred from making contributions. The lawsuit claims that these absolute restrictions violate the First Amendment.

Betty Gallo, a plaintiff in the case, heads the lobbying and government relations firm Betty Gallo & Co., and has lobbied before the state General Assembly since 1976. She feels the new campaign finance law will unfairly limit her right to actively participate in the political process as a "responsible citizen." "The way this law is written if my doctor said, ‘I got a request for a campaign contribution from my representative. Is she good on the expansion of HUSKY? Should I send her money?' I can't answer that question. If my neighbor said, ‘This Senator is doing a fundraiser next week. How is he on infertility coverage or same sex marriage?' I can't answer that question. I can no longer serve as a campaign manager for a state race. And I can't even give a $25 contribution to a friend running for office," Gallo said.

In addition to Derosa and Gallo, the ACLU is representing the Green Party of Connecticut; Dr. Joanne P. Philips, the wife of Don Philips who is a communicator lobbyist for the Connecticut Bar Association; the Libertarian Party of Connecticut; and the ACLU of Connecticut.

Redman and National ACLU Senior Staff Attorney Mark Lopez are co-counsel in the case.

The ACLU is seeking permanent injunctive relief prohibiting the implementation of the challenged provisions.