From our private database of 33,800+ case briefs...
281 Care Committee v. Arneson
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
766 F.3d 774 (2014), cert. denied, 575 U.S. 912 (2015)
The Minnesota Fair Campaign Practices Act (FCPA) criminalized false statements in political advertising or campaign material. Initially, Minnesota required county attorneys to prosecute violations directly, but a 2004 amendment imposed an administrative procedure. Anyone claiming someone lied in the political process could lodge a civil complaint with the Minnesota Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH). An administrative law judge would conduct a probable cause assessment, followed by a hearing before a three-judge panel, then a referral to a county attorney who could decide whether to prosecute violations. Two grassroots advocacy organizations founded to oppose school-funding ballot initiatives, 281 Care Committee and Citizens for Quality Education, and their leaders, Ron Stoffel and Joel Brude (collectively, plaintiffs), brought a lawsuit against the Minnesota attorney general and two county attorneys (defendants) claiming the provision unconstitutionally restricted free speech. After an appeal confirmed the claimants had standing, the appellate court remanded to the trial court to analyze the First Amendment claims applying strict scrutiny. Meanwhile, in United States v. Alvarez, 123 S. Ct. 2537 (2012), a four-justice plurality applied strict scrutiny to invalidate a federal law criminalizing false statements about military honors, whereas the concurrence applied only intermediate scrutiny reaching the same conclusion. Back on remand, the trial court granted summary judgment, reasoning that the FCPA provision passed even strict scrutiny. The advocacy organizations appealed again.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Beam, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 606,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 606,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,800 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.