Grassroots organizations face legal challenge
Groups such as Indivisible Greenwich and other grassroots organizations that have emerged as part of the Trump resistance could face new hurdles if the latest ruling by the State Elections Enforcement Commission becomes official.
The preliminary ruling is not in response to a complaint filed by state Republican Party chairman J.R. Romano against Indivisible Greenwich in November, but it speaks to the same legal point, Josh Foley, staff attorney and spokesman for the SEEC, said.
At issue is the question of whether citizen groups are operating within the bounds of campaign finance regulations.
“Obviously this isn’t directed at us and there are so many groups in the state on the political spectrum that this is designed to deal with,” said Joanna Swomley, founder of Indivisible Greenwich. “But we’re interested because it relates to the political activity of organized groups like ours, and because it touches on an issue that we are the subject of in a complaint before the SEEC. When it relates to what groups such as ours can and cannot do, we’re interested.”
The investigation into that complaint and others is still ongoing, but the parameters outlined in the new ruling could provide a framework for the outcome of those investigations. That’s why the ruling — and all it’s nittygritty legal language — has caught the attention of groups like Indivisible Greenwich.
In his complaint, Romano said Indivisible Greenwich was operating as a political action committee without registering as one. He claims the group was operating outside state election laws, particularly when it came to money being spent in the election, and that it was actively promoting the election of certain candidates and the defeat of others.
Indivisible Greenwich, a group that was created after former Greenwich resident Donald J. Trump was elected president, issued a slate of endorsements in the local RTM race last year, and from that list, 22 out of 24 people were elected.
Swomley said Indivisible Greenwich does not spend money on political campaigns.
The new preliminary ruling, which outlines what organized groups can and cannot do in terms of political activity, is an updated response to the 2010 Citizens United decision, which ultimately decided corporations could be treated as individuals when it comes to political contributions. Citizens United rendered the state’s previous guidelines for organized groups obsolete.
The overall purpose of the new ruling is to outline what organized groups like Indivisible Greenwich can and cannot do without being registered as an official political action committee, which would subject the group to state regulations and related expenses, as well as place limits on the amount they could spend on political campaigns.
The Indivisible movement has more than 6,000 chapters nationwide. Swomley said the group is non-partisan and has endorsed people of all parties. She added that Indivisible Greenwich encouraged its members to run for office and that any money it raised went to fund operating expenses.
The SEEC ruling is now subject to public comment and could be approved later this month. Foley said there is no timeline for a resolution to the complaints against Indivisible Greenwich.