Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, October 19, 1995 TAG: 9510190066
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-3 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
SOURCE: JAN VERTEFEUILLE STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
U.S. District Judge Samuel Wilson last week issued a temporary restraining order forbidding the state from enforcing part of its campaign finance law against the Virginia Society for Human Life.
In the past, the state Democratic Party has sought to stop the distribution of voter guides by that and other conservative groups because they had not registered with the state as political committees, as required by the law.
The restraining order gives Wilson time to decide whether to issue a preliminary injunction that would last through the Nov. 7 election - and could be expanded to cover other advocacy groups - or whether to leave the matter up to the Virginia Supreme Court.
Wilson expressed concern last week about ruling on the federal level about a state law's constitutionality before the issue had gone before the state's high court.
The attorney general's office filed a motion Tuesday asking that Wilson give the Supreme Court a chance to interpret the law before he rules on it.
If Wilson decides to rule on the law himself, his ruling is not likely to be one the attorney general's office wants. Wilson said from the bench during last week's hearing that he believed the way the law has been used by state judges was unconstitutional prior restraint, a violation of the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech.
Rather than risk Wilson's overturning the campaign finance disclosure law so close to the election, the state said it would not object to his converting the restraining order into an injunction that would last until the Virginia Supreme Court ruled.
Three times since 1989, state judges have issued injunctions on the eve of elections prohibiting distribution of voter guides by conservative groups because they had not registered with the state as political committees. The Democratic Party of Virginia had sought the injunctions.
"This was prior restraint that clearly infringed on First Amendment rights and used this statute as a base," Wilson said in court.
The state attorney general's office argued that - unlike the judges involved - it did not interpret the law to apply to groups advocating on behalf of issues, but only to groups or individuals who spend more than $100 advocating on behalf of specific candidates.
Wilson's ruling last week means the Virginia Society for Human Life, an anti-abortion group, is free to distribute its voter guides this year without having to file as a "political committee" with the state, identify the name of the group on the guides or file financial disclosure reports, as other groups must.
The group's local attorney, Donald Huffman, said Wednesday that he has no objection to the Virginia Supreme Court having first shot at ruling on the law's constitutionality.
"That's the proper federalism approach," Huffman said. "It ought to first be interpreted by the [state] Supreme Court."
The main thing he's interested in is keeping Wilson's restraining order in effect through the election next month so the group won't have to worry about having distribution of its voter guides stopped.
"That's the big thing for us, to keep that in effect," he said.
The group sued the state Board of Elections and commonwealth's attorneys in federal court because there is also a federal constitutional question under the First Amendment.
Keywords:
POLITICS
Memo: NOTE: Shorter version ran in Metro edition.