Contributions to noncandidate committees; limits

Case Notes Contribution limit in this section is unconstitutional as applied to plaintiffs' proposed contributions to an entity that engages in solely independent expenditures in excess of the statutory limit; plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction granted. 744 F. Supp. 2d 1075 (2010). Plaintiffs, who sought a declaration stating that this section was facially unconstitutional at the preliminary injunction stage, would not likely succeed on the merits; this section's limitation appears to be valid as applied to contributions to a noncandidate committee that does not engage solely in independent expenditures; plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction denied as to this issue. 744 F. Supp. 2d 1075 (2010). Plaintiff donors to political action committee had standing to challenge this section; they desired to and eventually made contributions that exceeded the statutory limitations, giving rise to an actual controversy; further, if this section was constitutional as applied, they could have been subject to administrative fines or criminal prosecution; moreover, they indicated a legitimate desire to make similar contributions in 2012, and thus a favorable ruling would have allowed them to make further contributions in 2012 without violating the law. 872 F. Supp. 2d 1023 (2012). This section limits the amount of contributions a person can make to a noncandidate committee ("committee"); if the committee makes only independent expenditures, then pursuant to the U.S. Supreme Court in Citizens United, Hawaii cannot limit those expenditures; plaintiff donors' contributions to a committee could only lead to independent expenditures; therefore, this section was unconstitutional as applied to plaintiffs' contributions to a committee and defendant campaign spending commission was permanently enjoined from enforcing this section's contribution limitation in that situation. 872 F. Supp. 2d 1023 (2012).