State of Iowa v. Lasondra A. Johnson

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the claim was not moot because the plaintiff expressed his intention to run for office in the next election
• recognizing that the test for contribution limits is whether “they are closely drawn to serve a sufficiently important interest”
• holding that standing is not “dispensed in gross” and must be established for each claim arid each form of relief
• holding that a 23 plaintiff’s standing to pursue one claim is not determinative of the plaintiff’s standing to pursue 24 other claims
• holding that the FEC failed to satisfy the “exacting security” standard review regarding campaign disclosure requirements
• holding that the plaintiff suffered a concrete harm by involuntarily disclosing that he spent personal funds on his election campaign

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).