In recent years, courts around the country have generally held that government cannot limit contributions to political action committees that make independent expenditures only (i.e., Super PACs). But in a recent case, (Vermont Right to Life, Inc. v. Sorrell (2014 WL 2958565)), the Second Circuit Court of Appeals held that contribution limits are permissible if the Super PAC is not functionally distinct from an entity that engages in activities other than independent expenditures (e.g., a “traditional” PAC that makes contributions to candidates).
In the case, Vermont Right to Life (VRLC) challenged, among other things, a Vermont law that limits contributions made to PACs, arguing that it should not apply to a Super PAC that VRLC controls. However, VRLC has both a Super PAC and a traditional PAC, and the Second Circuit, affirming an earlier U.S. District Court decision, found that VRLC’s Super PAC was “enmeshed financially and organizationally” with its traditional PAC. Thus, the Super PAC was subject to the state’s contribution limits.
The court held that VRLC needed to show actual organizational separation between the PAC and the Super PAC; having separate bank accounts and stating in organizational documents that a group was a Super PAC was not enough. The court stated that factors measuring organizational separation could include overlap of staff and resources, degree of financial independence, coordination of activities, and flow of information between the entities.
