Political Law - Campaign Finance & Election Law

Osborn Maledon attorneys provide a wide range of political law advice, with a particular emphasis on campaign finance, corporate compliance, election law, lobbying regulations and related constitutional and ethical issues.   We advise government entities, businesses, non-profits, political committees, organizations with PACs or separate segregated funds, trade associations, political consultants, and candidates on legal issues in this rapidly changing area of law.    

Our experience includes:

• Advising groups supporting or opposing state or local initiatives or referenda
• Drafting legislation and initiatives or referenda and advising clients on the implications of draft legislation.
• Advising on campaign finance compliance issues, including registration and reporting requirements and all applicable regulations
• Assisting with the formation of independent expenditure committees and other organizations that influence elections
• Reviewing campaign finance reports for political committees
• Representing government agencies or political committees in campaign finance enforcement actions
• Litigating the constitutionality of state election and campaign finance laws
• Conducting internal investigations related to an organization’s political activities
• Representing the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission on all issues relevant to congressional and legislative redistricting and defending it in state and federal litigation

The political law team is led by Mary O’Grady who has comprehensive political experience, both representing government officials charged with enforcing and defending campaign finance laws and representing corporations, political committees, and candidates.  Osborn Maledon’s team includes seasoned litigators as well as transactional attorneys who can address the full spectrum of issues that may confront a client, from counseling regarding the formation of political committees or non-profit advocacy groups, advising on compliance issues, to litigating complex first amendment cases.

Associated Attorneys

Associated Announcements

• Unanimous U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Redistricting Maps of Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission
• U.S. Supreme Court lets stand 10th Circuit decision barring requirement of extra ID for voter registration
• U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Arizona's Independent Redistricting Commission

Representative Cases

• Ariz. Citizens Clean Elections Comm'n v. Brain, 234 Ariz. 322, 322 P.3d 139, 683 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 43 (Ariz., 2014)
  (holding that legislation modifying contribution limits does not violate state constitutional requirements for modifying voter initiatives)
• Ariz. Free Enter. Club's Freedom Club Pac v. Bennett, 564 U.S. ___ (2011)
  (holding that matching funds component of Arizona’s public campaign finance program violates First Amendment)
• Time v. Brewer, 196 P.3d 229, 219 Ariz. 207 (Ariz. 2008)
  (timeliness of challenge to decision to disqualify initiative signatures)
• Kobach v. U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 772 F.3d 1183 (10th Cir. 2014)
  (holding that Federal Elections Assistance Commission was not mandated to grant Arizona’s and other state requests to modify voter registration form)
• Wilcox v. Arpaio, 753 F.3d 872 (9th Cir. 2014)
  (affirming enforcement of settlement favorable to public official who alleged she was target of politically motivated arrest)
• Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., 133 S. Ct. 2247 (2013)
  (holding that federal law preempted Arizona’s law requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration)
• Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, 993 F. Supp. 2d 1042 (D. Ariz. 2014)
  (three-judge panel) (rejecting claims that legislative districting plan violated Constitution)
• Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, 997 F. Supp. 2d 1047 (D. Ariz. 2014)
  (three-judge panel) (holding that independent commission created by popular initiative did not violate Elections Clause)
• Fields v. The Elected Officials’ Retirement Plan, et al., 234 Ariz. 214, 320 P.3d 1160 (2014)
  (Arizona constitution/public retirement benefits)
  Oral Argument
  Answering Brief
  Response to Amicus Briefs
• Arizona Indep. Redistricting Comm'n v. Brewer, 229 Ariz. 347, 275 P.3d 1267, 632 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 32 (Ariz. 2012)
  (special action appeal holding that Governor’s removal of Commission’s chairperson was unconstitutional)
• State ex rel. Montgomery v. Comm'r Colleen Mathis, 231 Ariz. 103, 290 P.3d 1226 (Ariz. App. 2012)
  (addressing powers of County Attorney to investigate members of Independent Redistricting Commission and affirming injunction against investigation)
• Adams v. the Comm'n On Appellate Court Appointments, 227 Ariz. 128, 254 P.3d 367 (Ariz. 2011)
  (state constitutional challenge to applicants for Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission)
• Harvey v. Brewer, 605 F.3d 1067 (9th Cir. 2010)
  (federal constitutional challenge to Arizona’s felon disenfranchisement laws)