Submitted by Eugene Volokh (not verified) on Wed, 2008-03-26 17:54.
Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I don't see how federal law would bar the fundraiser, even if Nikitovic's wife weren't a U.S. citizen. 2 U.S.C. sec. 441e does bar foreign nationals from making "a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value" to a candidate. But sec. 431(8)(B)(ii) expressly says that "The term 'contribution' does not include .... the use of real or personal property ... voluntarily provided by an individual to any candidate or any political committee of a political party in rendering voluntary personal services on the individual's residential premises"; this also includes up to $1000 worth of incidental "invitations, food, and beverages." I checked with some people who know more about election law than I do, and they echo this; and my sense from my exchange with them is that the phrase "or donation" in sec. 441e doesn't broaden the concept to cover that which the definition of "contribution" in sec. 431(8)(B)(ii) explicitly excludes. It may have been politically wise for Rep. Bean to move the fundraiser, but based on the account above I don't see any legal obligation for her to do so. (I should note that I'm entirely unaffiliated with any parties involved, and in fact had never heard of Rep. Bean until a reader pointed me to this article). Eugene Volokh Professor of Law UCLA School of Law Blogger, The Volokh Conspiracy, http://volokh.com
No legal problem with foreign citizen's hosting home fundraiser
Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I don't see how federal law would bar the fundraiser, even if Nikitovic's wife weren't a U.S. citizen. 2 U.S.C. sec. 441e does bar foreign nationals from making "a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value" to a candidate. But sec. 431(8)(B)(ii) expressly says that "The term 'contribution' does not include .... the use of real or personal property ... voluntarily provided by an individual to any candidate or any political committee of a political party in rendering voluntary personal services on the individual's residential premises"; this also includes up to $1000 worth of incidental "invitations, food, and beverages." I checked with some people who know more about election law than I do, and they echo this; and my sense from my exchange with them is that the phrase "or donation" in sec. 441e doesn't broaden the concept to cover that which the definition of "contribution" in sec. 431(8)(B)(ii) explicitly excludes. It may have been politically wise for Rep. Bean to move the fundraiser, but based on the account above I don't see any legal obligation for her to do so. (I should note that I'm entirely unaffiliated with any parties involved, and in fact had never heard of Rep. Bean until a reader pointed me to this article). Eugene Volokh Professor of Law UCLA School of Law Blogger, The Volokh Conspiracy, http://volokh.com