Legal Opinion
Colorado Ethics Watch v. Senate Majority Fund, LLC
Colorado Court of Appeals
Decided March 18, 2010No. 08CA2689, 09CA0384PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Judge GABRIEL,
This case requires us to determine the meaning of "expressly advocating the election or defeat of a candidate," as that phrase is used within the definition of "expenditure" contained in article XXVIII, section 2(8) of the Colorado Constitution. Petitioner, Colorado Ethics Watch (Ethics Watch), contends that "expressly advocating" encompasses more than just advertisements using the so-called "magic words" of electoral advocacy delineated in Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 44 n. 52, 96 S.Ct. 612, 46 L.Ed.2d 659 (1976), and their synonyms. Ethics Watch argues instead that…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Buckley v. ValeoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Citizens United v. Federal Election CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- McConnell v. Federal Election CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Federal Election Commission v. Massachusetts Citizens for Life, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Colorado Ethics Watch v. Senate Majority Fund, LLCSupreme Court of Colorado · 2012
- v. Frias Drywall, LLCColorado Court of Appeals · 2019