Schonberg v. Federal Election Commission
792 F. Supp. 2d 14
D.D.C.2011Background
- Schonberg, a Florida resident, ran for Congress in 2010 and aims to run in 2012.
- He filed a 2010 action for declaratory judgment and injunction against the FEC challenging FECA and BCRA as unconstitutional.
- He sought designation for a three-judge district court under BCRA § 403(a)(1).
- The three-judge panel was convened with judges Rogers, Kollar-Kotelly, and Roberts.
- The Commission moved to dissolve the three-judge court, and Schonberg sought trifurcation; subsequent amendments added the United States as a defendant.
- The court granted the Commission's motion to dissolve the three-judge court, holding no jurisdiction over the BCRA claim and related MRA claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether BCRA § 301 challenge belongs in the three-judge court | Schonberg argues BCRA § 301 is constitutional challenge | Commission says it is a FECA challenge requiring en banc review | BCRA § 301 challenge is FECA-based; not within three-judge court |
| Whether the BCRA claim is properly before the three-judge court | Claim intertwined with BCRA rather than FECA | McConnell standing and redressability deny jurisdiction | McConnell/standing bars three-judge court jurisdiction over BCRA claim |
| Whether Schonberg has standing to pursue BCRA/MRA claims | Injury from incumbents’ advantages under BCRA | No redressability if FECA remains even if BCRA struck | Lack of standing; dissolution appropriate |
Key Cases Cited
- McConnell v. FEC, 540 U.S. 93 (2003) (standing and jurisdiction principles for BCRA challenges; FECA limits)
- Gonzalez v. Automatic Empl. Credit Union, 419 U.S. 90 (1974) (three-judge court dissolution when lacking standing/subject-matter jurisdiction)
- Feinberg v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp., 522 F.2d 1335 (D.C. Cir. 1975) (necessity of justiciability before three-judge court)
- Rostker v. Goldberg, 453 U.S. 57 (1981) (justiciability and standing in constitutional challenges)
- Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425 (1886) (unconstitutional acts confer no rights; redressability concern)
- Lake Carriers' Ass'n v. MacMullan, 406 U.S. 498 (1972) (ancillary claims before three-judge court if nonfrivolous constitutional claim exists)