Preview:

****************************************************** The ``officially released'' date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the ``officially released'' date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the ``officially released'' date. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ****************************************************** GABRIEL SEYMOUR ET AL. v. ELECTIONS ENFORCEMENT COMMISSION (SC 16167)
McDonald, C. J., and Borden, Norcott, Palmer and Sullivan, Js. Argued December 9, 1999--officially released December 19, 2000 Counsel

David R. Schaefer, with whom, on the brief, was Whitney North Seymour, Jr., for the appellants (plaintiffs). Eliot D. Prescott, assistant attorney general, with whom, on the brief, were Richard Blumenthal, attorney general, and Carolyn K. Querijero, assistant attorney general, for the appellee (defendant). Martin B. Margulies and Philip D. Tegeler filed a brief for the Connecticut Civil Liberties Union Foundation as amicus curiae.
Opinion

NORCOTT, J. This case raises important questions regarding the constitutionality of Connecticut's political advertising disclosure laws and the commission created to enforce them. After an evidentiary hearing, the

defendant, the state elections enforcement commission (commission), found that the plaintiffs, Gabriel Seymour and Robert Reid, had violated certain campaign finance laws. The plaintiffs appealed from the decision of the commission to the trial court. The trial court affirmed the commission's finding that the plaintiffs had violated the campaign law in question and its order that they were henceforth to comply with the statute, and accordingly, dismissed the plaintiffs' appeal. This appeal followed.1 We affirm the judgment of the trial court. The following facts are relevant to our disposition of this appeal. This case arises out of the plaintiffs' 1997 campaign for the position of first selectman and a position on the board of selectmen of Falls Village, respectively. On September 3, 1997, and again on September 12, 1997, the plaintiffs released statements to local newspapers with the intention that the statements be published. The plaintiffs prepared each statement on a personal computer and faxed the documents to at least three local newspapers. The expenses associated with the statements were shared equally by the plaintiffs. Although the statements contained both plaintiffs' names and telephone numbers, neither statement indicated who had paid for them. On September 18, 1997, and again on October 8, 1997, James P. McGuire filed complaints2 with the commission claiming that the plaintiffs had failed to include the ``paid for by'' attribution requirement, as mandated by General Statutes

Download Seymour v. Elections Enforcement Commission (dissent below).pdf

Connecticut Law