Facts:  During the 2004 campaign, the petitioner Voters Education Committee sponsored television advertisements criticizing Deborah Senn, a candidate for attorney general, without registering as a political committee or disclosing information regarding its contributions and expenditures as required by the Fair Campaign Practices Act (Washington Revised Code §42.17).  The respondent Public Disclosure Commission subsequently brought an enforcement action against the Voters Education Committee in the Superior Court for Thurston County.  In response, the Voters Education Committee petitioned the Superior Court for King County for a declaratory judgment that its advertisements were protected under the 1^st Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I §5 of the Washington State Constitution.  The Superior Court for King County denied the petition, ruling that §42.17’s disclosure requirements are constitutional.  The Voters Education Committee appealed this decision directly to the Supreme Court of Washington.

Question(s):  Is the definition of a “political committee” under §42.17 unconstitutionally vague?

Does Article I §5 confer greater protection against disclosure requirements than the 1^st Amendment?

Conclusion:  Justice Fairhurst’s opinion for the Court affirmed the superior court, concluding that §42.17’s use of the phrase “in support of, or opposition to, any candidate” in its definition of a “political committee” is not unconstitutionally vague as a person of ordinary intelligence would have a reasonable opportunity to understand its meaning.  The Court also held that there is no reason to believe that the framers of Article I §5 intended to confer greater protection against disclosure requirements than that conferred by the 1^st Amendment.

Docket No. 77724-1 (from King Case No. 04-2-23551-1)

Petitioner: Voters Education Committee

(Counsel: John James White, Jr., Kevin Blair Hansen, David H. Thompson, and Charles Cooper)

Respondent: Public Disclosure Commission

(Counsel: Linda Anne Dalton, Carol A. Murphy, and Jeffrey David Goltz )

Argument: Thursday, May 25, 2006 1:30pm

[Source: TVW, http://tvw.org]

Decided: Thursday, September 13th, 2007

Prevailing Party: Public Disclosure Commission (Respondent)

Vote: 7-2

Opinion: 161 Wn.2d 470 (2007)

Court: Alexander3 Court (2005-2007)

Alexander

Johnson

Madsen

Sanders

Bridge

Chambers

Owens

Fairhurst

Johnson