Human Life of Washington, Inc. v. Chair Bill Brumsickle

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that “the definition of ‘political committee’ does not violate the First Amendment,” analyzing “the disclosure requirements attached to political committee status”
• concluding that there was a reasonable expectation that the controversy would recur because the plaintiff was a politically active organization that had been heavily involved in public debates in the past and intended to undertake future communications
• concluding that there was a reasonable expectation that the controversy would recur because the plaintiff was a politically active organization that had been heavily involved in public debates in the past and intended to undertake future communications
• noting that Citizens United overruled prior Ninth Circuit precedent that applied strict scrutiny to disclosure laws
• concluding that Buckley did not lay down a bright-line test requiring that the major purpose of an organization must be to support or oppose a candidate, and that a state law regulating organizations with a major purpose of engaging in such actions was constitutional
• recognizing the “vital provision of information” to voters through disclosure laws “repeatedly has been recognized as a sufficiently important, if not compelling, governmental interest”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).