Litigation We're Watching

Last Updated 08/2021

Ted Cruz for Senate, et al. v. FEC (D.D.C. 1:19-cv-00908). On June 3, 2021, a three-judge panel of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that section 304 of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA), which limits the repayment of candidate loans, is unconstitutional. California’s Political Reform Act has a similar loan limit which may be impacted by the final ruling when this case fully resolves.

de la Torre v. City of Santa Monica (filed March 3, 2021 in Los Angeles County Superior Court). Councilmember filed suit against City of Santa Monica, alleging other council members wrongly voted to exclude Councilman de la Torre from decisions relating to an existing voting rights case against the City in which Councilman de la Torre’s wife is a plaintiff.

Exline v. Gillmor (Court of Appeal of the State of California, Fourth Appellate District, opinion 07/29/21) Case posed the issue whether a civil enforcement lawsuit under the Political Reform Act that challenged the completeness of a publoc official’s Form 700 (Statement of Economic Interests) is subject to California’s anti-SLAPP law. The appellate court ruled in the affirmative, holding that a plaintiff’s lawsuit regarding a Form 700 filing is not “in the public interest” under Section 425.17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, because a Form 700 is tantamount to a “political work.”