Legal Library
Access NVRI’s legal documents on any case by clicking on the list below.
Cases are arranged by subject matter:
- Challenging the Wealth Primary
- Defending Spending Limits: Re-examining Buckley v. Valeo
- Defending Other Reforms
- Challenging Other Barriers to Political Participation
Some files require Adobe Acrobat Reader.
Challenging the Wealth Primary
NVRI has pioneered legal challenges to the system of private campaign financing, which makes access to wealth a precondition for elected office – the "wealth primary."
Click here for more information about the wealth primary.
Active Case
Concluded cases
Defending Spending Limits: Re-Examining Buckley V. Valeo
By defending state and local limits on candidate expenditures, NVRI has been at the forefront of efforts to revisit the Supreme Court’s 1976 Buckley v. Valeo decision invalidating federal spending limits.
Click here to learn more about NVRI's work defending campaign spending limits
Active Cases:
- Landell et al. v. Sorrell
- Summary and Analysis of Second Circuit Ruling (April 2005)
- Landell Second Circuit Denial of Motion for Appeal (February 2005)
- Landell Second Circuit Denial of Motion for Appeal Dissents (April 2005)
- Landell Second Circuit Opinion (August 2004)
- Appellate brief, Landell Second Circuit Dissent (August 2004)
- Trial Brief (May 2000)
- Landell Appellate Brief
- Landell Reply and Response Brief
Concluded Cases
- Homans v. City of Albuquerque before U.S. Supreme Court
- Petitioners' Brief (Sept.22, 2004)
Amicus briefs in support of Petitioners - Former Senators Bradley and Simpson
- Current Senators
- Civil Rights Organzations
- Campaign Finance Reform Organizations
- Secretaries of States
- Attorneys General
- Current and Former State Judges
- Homans v. City of Albuquerque - Lower Courts
- Table of Contents for Defendants-Appellants' Opening Brief
- Defendants-Appellants' Opening Brief
- District Court's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (August 22, 2002)
- Defendant's Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment(July 5, 2002)
- Defendant's Memorandum Brief on the Merits (March 4, 2002)
- Defendant's Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (March 4, 2002)
- Memorandum Opinion and Order denying preliminary injunction and upholding the city of Albuquerque’s spending limits for municipal campaigns
- Tenth Circuit Ruling Granting Emergency Motion for Preliminary Injunction
- Opposition to Emergency Relief Requested
- Amicus Brief of the States of Colorado and New Mexico in Opposition to Emergency Relief Requested by Plaintiff
- City of Albuquerque's brief in opposition to petition for preliminary injunction
- Declaration of Jim Baca, Mayor of Albuquerque in opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction.
- Albuquerque Election Financing: An Analysis by Anthony Gierzynski, Ph.D. professor of political science at The University of Vermont
- Public Perceptions of Campaign Spending Limits: Findings from a Survey of 400 Registered Voters in the City of Albuquerque, NM
- Kruse v. City of Cincinnati
- Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment
- Appellate Brief
- Petition for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Suster v. Marshall
Defending Other Reforms
NVRI has defended a broad range of campaign finance reform measures, from contribution limits to disclosure provisions and public funding of elections.
Click here for more infomation about NVRI's defense of meaningful campaign finance reforms
Active Cases
- Jacobus v. State of Alaska: Defending the constitutionality of Alaska's limits on soft money contributions to political parties
- MCCL v. Kelley: Fighting for Comprehensive Campaign Finance Reform in Minnesota
Concluded Cases
- Bates v. Sullivan: Fighting for Full Funding of the Mass Clean Elections Law
- Plaintiff's Appellant Brief (June 19, 2002)
- Memorandum of Decision & Order on Plaintiff's Emergency Motion for a Levy on Property of the Commonwealth (April 5, 2002)
- Plaintiff's Emergency Motion for a Levy on Property of the Commonwealth (March 19, 2002)
- Memorandum of Decision and Order on Plaintiff's Motion for Relief (March 12, 2002)
- Memorandum of Order of Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (February 25, 2002)
- Plaintiff's Letter on the Question of Sovereign Immunity
- Plaintiff's Brief on the Question of Relief
- Memorandum and Order of Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (January 25, 2002)
- Plaintiff's Reply Brief before Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
- Plaintiff's Opening Brief before Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
- Complaint
- Motion for Preliminary Injunction
- Marc Katz v. City of Austin, Texas: Defending Contribution Limits in Austin, Texas
- FEC v. Colorado Republican Campaign Committee
- Frank v. City of Akron: Defending Contribution Limits in Akron, Ohio
- Montana Chamber of Commerce v. Argenbright
- Stenson et al. v. McLaughlin: New Hampshire's Reporting and Disclosure Requirements
Challenging Other Barriers to Political Participation
NVRI litigates on behalf of voters around the country to strike down wealth barriers to political participation, to force observance of the existing laws designed to protect the integrity of the political process, and to vindicate the basic political rights protected by our Constitution.
Click here for more information about NVRI's work to challenge barriers to political participation.
Active Cases
- Hagelin et al. v. FEC: Lawsuit Against FEC for Wrongful Dismissal of Complaint Against Commission of Presidential Debates.
Plaintiffs' Summary Judgment Motion (June 21, 2004)Plaintiffs' Summary Judgment Exhibits 1-3 (June 21, 2004)Plaintiffs' Summary Judgment Exhibits 4-10 (June 21, 2004)Wrongful Dismissal Complaint Against the FEC (May 5, 2004)Exhibits to Wrongful Dismissal Complaint Against the FEC (May 5, 2004)First General Counsel's Report in MURs 4451 and 4473 (June 8, 2004)
- Hagelin et al. v. Commission on Presidential Debates: FEC administrative complaint challenging CPD conduct of Presidential Debates.
- Administrative Complaint (June 17, 2003)
- Exhibits to the Administrative Complaint (June 17, 2003)
- Aguirre v. Chief Justice Thomas R. Phillips: Challenging the Texas Supreme Court's Practice of Keeping Votes on Petitions for Review Secret.
- Alliance for Democracy et al. v. FEC: Charging Major Violations of Campaign Finance Laws by Ashcroft 2000 and Spirit of America PAC.
- Detailed Discovery Plan and Authority in Support Thereof (November 12, 2002)
- Litigation Complaint (March 19, 2002)
- Administrative Complaint (March 8, 2001)
- Camacho et al. v. Finneran: Challenging Redistricting Plan on Voting Rights Grounds in Chelsea and South Boston, MA.
- Indictment of ex-Speaker Finneran for Perjury (June 9, 2005)
- Final District Court Decision (June 21, 2004)
- District Court Opinion Finding for the Plaintiffs (February 24, 2004)
- Complaint (March 12, 2002)
- Belitskus et al. v. Pizzingrilli: Challenging Pennsylvania's Mandatory Candidate Filing Fees
- Memorandum of Law Ruling Pennsylvania's Filing Fee System Unconstitutional
- Complaint
- Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Temporary Restraining order
- Reply in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgement
- Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs' Renewed Motion for Summary Judgement
- Appeal Brief
- Porter et al. v. Jones: Protecting the Internet as a Tool of Political Association
- Appellants' Reply Brief
- Appellants' Opening Brief
- First Amended Complaint
- Memorandum of Law in Support of Application for Temporary Restraining Order (coming soon)
- Reply Memorandum in Support of Application for Temporary Restraining Order
- Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss
- Ninth Circuit Court Opinion
Concluded Cases
- Nike, Inc. v. Marc Kasky: Filing a "friend of the court" brief on behalf of ReclaimDemocracy.org arguing that corporations are not entitled to the same constitutional protection as individuals.
- AFL-CIO v. FEC: Filing a "friend of the court" brief with other reform groups to protect public disclosure by the Federal Eletion Commission of its investigative files on closed campaign finance enforcement matters.
- Adams et al. v. FEC: Challenging the Hard Money Increases in McCain-Feingold Campaign Reform Law.
- Adams et. al. v. FEC Opening Brief to the U.S. Supreme Court (July 8, 2003)
- Public Campaign Amicus Brief to U.S. Supreme Court (July 8, 2003)
- Adams et. al. v. FEC Jurisdictional Statement (May 29, 2003)
- Adams et al. v. FEC Plaintiff's Findings of Fact (November 26, 2002)
- Adams et. al. v. FEC Opposition Brief (November 20, 2002)
- Adams et al. v. FEC Plaintiff's Opening Brief (November 6, 2002)
- Letter to Susan Buckley (October 11, 2002)
- McConnell Transcript Designations (October 3, 2002)
- McConnell Confidential Deposition (September 23, 2002)
- McConnell Deposition Transcript (September 23, 2002)
- Thompson Depostion Transcript (September 19, 2002)
- Feingold Deposition Transcript (September 9, 2002)
- Hilliard Deposition Transcript (September 5, 2002)
- Complaint (May 7, 2002)
- Background Memo
- Biener v. Greenway: amicus brief supporting challenge to Delaware's exclusionary filing fee.
- Becker v. FEC: Challenging Corporate Funding of Presidential Debates
- Brentwood Academy v. Tennessee Secondary Schools Athletic Association
- Objection Letter Under the Voting Rights Act: Using Section 5 to Fight Campaign Finance Measures that Harm Minorities
- NVRI comment letter to the Department of Justice on proposed contribution limit increases in Georgia
- Second NVRI comment letter
- Jill E. Stein and Barbara Johnson v. The Boston Globe, WBZ-TV, WCVB-TV, WGBH-TV, WHDH-TV and New England Cable News: Challenging Exclusive Massachusetts Gubernatorial Debates