Political parties ask that campaign-finance documents remain secret

By The Associated Press

01.04.03

Printer-friendly page

WASHINGTON — Republican and Democratic party officials have joined the Justice Department in trying to keep secret some documents submitted in lawsuits over new campaign-finance rules, arguing they contain sensitive political and strategic information.

In papers filed in U.S. District Court in Washington this week, the Republican National Committee, along with the California Democratic and Republican parties, opposed an effort by news organizations to unseal all documents submitted in the lawsuits, which challenge the constitutionality of the nation's new campaign-finance law.

The news organizations are seeking access to thousands of pages currently under seal. They contend the public has a right to a full airing of the evidence presented to the court as it decides whether to strike down major provisions of the law, the first national overhaul of political fund-raising rules in a quarter-century.

Those joining in the motion include the Associated Press; ABC Inc.; The Baltimore Sun Co.; Daily News LP; Dow Jones & Co.; Los Angeles Times Communications L.L.C.; National Broadcasting Co. Inc.; Newsday Inc.; The New York Times Co.; U.S. News & World Report and The Washington Post Co.

The new law, which took effect last November, bans national party committees from raising unlimited contributions known as soft money and imposes new election-time ad restrictions on many special-interest groups.

Several groups are suing to try to strike down those and other parts of the law, contending they violate free-speech and other constitutional rights.

Related

Debate in campaign-finance trial shifts to hard money
As two-day trial wraps up, FEC releases more information on how it will enforce the law.  12.06.02

Supreme Court gears up for high-profile First Amendment cases
Analysis Cross-burning, Mickey Mouse copyright, library filtering, campaign finance should make for an interesting spring at the high court.  01.01.03