11 CFR 104.20 - Reporting electioneering communications (2 U.S.C. 434(f))

Cite as11 CFR 104.20
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
57 practice notes
20 cases
  • Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Wash. v. Fed. Election Comm'n, Civil Action No. 16-259 (BAH)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. United States District Court (Columbia)
    • August 3, 2018
    ...on the disclosure date." Id. (quoting § 30104(f)(2)(F) ) (emphasis added). The FEC implemented § 30104(f) in 2007 by promulgating 11 C.F.R. § 104.20(c)(9), which requires disclosure, in relevant part, of "the name and address of each person who made a donation aggregating $1,000 or more to ......
  • Ctr. for Individual Freedom, Inc. v. Tennant, Civil Action Nos. 1:08–cv–00190
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. Southern District of West Virginia
    • July 18, 2011
    ...owners of the entity or person making the disbursement for the electioneering communication.’ ” (Docket 210 at 31 (quoting 11 C.F.R. § 104.20(a)(3)).) During the pendency of this action, West Virginia has implemented a similar provision, albeit in the relevant administrative reporting forms......
  • McConnell v. Fed. Election Comm'n, No. 02–582 CKK,KLH,RJL
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. United States District Court (Columbia)
    • May 1, 2003
    ...to divulge confidential strategic and political information about their possible future activities.Explanation and Justification of 11 C.F.R. 104.20, Reporting Electioneering Communications, 68 Fed.Reg. at 404, 409 (Jan. 3, 2003).71 The regulations provide in part:(1) Disclosure date means:......
  • Van Hollen v. Fed. Election Comm'n, Civil Action No. 11–0766 (ABJ).
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. United States District Court (Columbia)
    • March 30, 2012
    ...requirements for corporations and labor unions that fund electioneering communications. Plaintiff contends that the regulation, 11 C.F.R. § 104.20(c)(9), which was promulgated in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. (“WRTL”), 551 U.S. 449, 127 S.C......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 firm's commentaries
2 books & journal articles

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT