Legal Opinion
Green Party of Connecticut v. Garfield
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided December 19, 2008No. Civil Action 3:06cv1030 (SRU)PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
STEFAN R. UNDERHILL, District Judge.
The instant motions for summary judgment present another chapter in the litigation over Connecticut’s recently-enacted campaign finance reform law. In those motions, the government and intervenor-defendants (collectively “the government” or “the state”) seek summary judgment on the plaintiffs’ claims that the campaign contribution and solicitation bans for certain lobbyists, state contractors, and their immediate family members violate their First Amendment rights of speech and association. 1 The plaintiffs have filed…
2Cases cited44 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Green Party of Connecticut v. GarfieldCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2010
- Dallman v. RitterSupreme Court of Colorado · 2010
- Green Party of Connecticut v. GarfieldCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2010
- Preston v. LeakeDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2009
- Green Party of Connecticut v. GarfieldDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2009
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.