Group Sues FEC to Open Presidential Debates to Independent Candidates

image
Published: 22 Jun, 2015
Updated: 15 Oct, 2022
2 min read

Level the Playing Field (LPF), the group that is trying to improve the health of American democracy by opening up the fall 2016 presidential debates, filed a lawsuit on Monday in federal district court against the Federal Election Commission. LPF was joined in the historic lawsuit by the Green Party and the Libertarian Party.

The plaintiffs are represented by Alexandra Shapiro, who was Ruth Bader Ginsburg's law clerk and is now with the Shapiro Arato firm. Ms. Shapiro has won several high-profile cases lately, including an appeals court ruling in April that overturned two insider-trading convictions.

The LPF lawsuit charges that the

Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) and certain of its directors have violated federal election law, including a Federal Election Commission (FEC) regulation requiring organizations like the CPD to be "nonpartisan" and to use "objective criteria" to determine who can be in their debates.

The federal court complaint cites extensive evidence showing that the CPD is not nonpartisan and instead promotes the candidates of the Democratic and Republican parties while excluding all others from the debates. And since 2000, it has used a criterion that only the Democratic and Republican nominees could reasonably achieve, in order to illegally exclude third-party and independent candidates from the debates.

According to the lawsuit, the failure of the FEC -- whose commissioners are members of the Democratic and Republican parties -- to act on an administrative complaint against the CPD and a petition for rulemaking was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and otherwise contrary to law.

We are asking the court to either direct the FEC to find that the CPD and certain of its directors have violated the law, or to permit us to bring a civil action directly against the CPD and those directors. The suit also asks the court to direct the FEC to open a rulemaking proceeding to revise its rules governing presidential debates.

Read the full complaint:

Here is an article that appeared on Time.com.

Here is another from Bloomberg.

Latest articles

Marijuana plant.
Why the War on Cannabis Refuses to Die: How Boomers and the Yippies Made Weed Political
For much of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, American physicians freely prescribed cannabis to treat a wide range of ailments. But by the mid-twentieth century, federal officials were laying the groundwork for a sweeping criminal crackdown. Cannabis would ultimately be classified as a Schedule I substance, placed alongside heroin and LSD, and transformed into a political weapon that shaped American policy for the next six decades....
30 Jun, 2025
-
2 min read
Donald Trump standing behind presidential podium and in front of two American flags.
Has Trump Made His Case for the Nobel Peace Prize?
A news item in recent days that was overshadowed in the media by SCOTUS and the One Big Beautiful Budget Bill was a US-brokered peace agreement that was signed between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) – which if it holds will end a conflict between the two countries that has killed thousands and displaced hundreds of thousands of people....
30 Jun, 2025
-
7 min read
Picture of skyscraper in New York behind a bridge.
Knives Come Out Against Reform at NYC CRC Hearing as Independents Rise
Last week in Staten Island, the NYC Charter Revision Commission held its next-to-last public hearing. As Commissioner Diane Savino commented, addressing NYC's closed primary system “is the single biggest issue we’ve heard this year.”...
30 Jun, 2025
-
3 min read