William B. Blount v. Securities and Exchange Commission, Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, Intervenor

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 Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board was a state actor because, inter alia, it was “created by an act of Congress”
• holding that there is no need to show evidence of any specific quid pro quo to support the regulation against First Amendment challenge because the dynamic to which regulation responded was “self-evident[ ]”
• upholding SEC Rule that prohibits municipal securities brokers and dealers from engaging in municipal securities business for two years after contributing more than $250 to state officials from whom they obtain business
• rejecting underinclusiveness argument where “petitioner ha[d] pointed to nothing that call[ed] ... into serious question” Congress’ judgment to leave “loopholes” due to “ ‘sensitivity’ to First Amendment concerns.”
• upholding SEC 19 Rule that prohibits municipal securities brokers and dealers from engaging in 20 municipal securities business for two years after contributing more than $250 25 1 to state officials from whom they obtain business
• applying strict scrutiny to SEC restrictions on municipal finance professionals’ campaign contributions to state and local officials but rejecting argument that agency must show “specific instances of quid pro quos”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).