McConnell v. Federal Election Commission

E669893

McConnell v. Federal Election Commission is a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case that largely upheld the constitutionality of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (McCain–Feingold Act), significantly shaping modern campaign finance law.

All labels observed (4)

How this entity was disambiguated

Statements (49)

Predicate Object
instanceOf United States Supreme Court case ⓘ
campaign finance case ⓘ
constitutional law case ⓘ
hasAlternativeName McConnell v. FEC ⓘ
McConnell v. Federal Election Comm’n ⓘ
hasAreaOfLaw First Amendment law ⓘ
campaign finance law ⓘ
hasArguedDate September 8, 2003 ⓘ
hasChiefJustice William H. Rehnquist ⓘ
hasCitation 540 U.S. 93 ⓘ
hasConstitutionalProvisionAtIssue Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ
First Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ
hasCountry United States ⓘ
hasCourt Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
hasDecisionDate December 10, 2003 ⓘ
hasDissentingJustice Anthony M. Kennedy ⓘ
Antonin Scalia ⓘ
Clarence Thomas ⓘ
Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ
Stephen G. Breyer ⓘ
William H. Rehnquist ⓘ
hasDocketNumber 02-1674 ⓘ
02-1675 ⓘ
hasFullCaseName Mitch McConnell, United States Senator, et al. v. Federal Election Commission et al. ⓘ
hasImpactOn modern U.S. campaign finance regime ⓘ
regulation of electioneering communications ⓘ
regulation of soft money in federal elections ⓘ
hasJoinedMajority David H. Souter ⓘ
John Paul Stevens ⓘ
Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ
Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ
Stephen G. Breyer ⓘ
hasMajorityOpinionBy John Paul Stevens ⓘ
Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ
hasPetitioner Mitch McConnell ⓘ
National Rifle Association ⓘ
hasRearguedDate September 9, 2003 ⓘ
hasRespondent Federal Election Commission ⓘ
United States ⓘ
hasStatuteAtIssue Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 ⓘ
held that many disclosure and reporting requirements in the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act are constitutional ⓘ
that restrictions on soft money contributions to national political parties are constitutional ⓘ
isRelatedCase Buckley v. Valeo ⓘ
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ⓘ
Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. v. Federal Election Commission ⓘ
limitedOverruledBy Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ⓘ
Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. v. Federal Election Commission ⓘ
upheldConstitutionalityOf Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act electioneering communications provisions ⓘ
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act soft money ban ⓘ

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (8)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce → relatedCase → McConnell v. Federal Election Commission ⓘ
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act → challengedInCase → McConnell v. Federal Election Commission ⓘ
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act → upheldInPartBy → McConnell v. Federal Election Commission ⓘ
United States federal campaign finance law → shapedBy → McConnell v. Federal Election Commission ⓘ
Paul Clement → notableCase → McConnell v. FEC ⓘ
linked to: McConnell v. Federal Election Commission
McConnell v. Federal Election Commission → hasFullCaseName → Mitch McConnell, United States Senator, et al. v. Federal Election Commission et al. ⓘ
linked to: McConnell v. Federal Election Commission
McConnell v. Federal Election Commission → hasAlternativeName → McConnell v. FEC ⓘ
linked to: McConnell v. Federal Election Commission
McConnell v. Federal Election Commission → hasAlternativeName → McConnell v. Federal Election Comm’n ⓘ
linked to: McConnell v. Federal Election Commission