(a) No contribution shall be made or received, and no expenditures shall be directly made
or incurred, to support or defeat a candidate except through:
(1) The candidate or duly appointed campaign treasurer or deputy campaign treasurer of
the candidate;
(2) The duly appointed campaign treasurer or deputy campaign treasurer of a political
party committee;
(3) The duly appointed campaign treasurer or deputy campaign treasurer of a political
action committee.
(b) It shall be lawful for any person, not otherwise prohibited by law and not acting
in concert with any other person or group, to expend personally from that person’s
own funds a sum that is not to be repaid to him or her for any purpose not prohibited
by law to support or defeat a candidate; provided, that any person making the expenditure
shall be required to report all of his or her expenditures and expenses, if the total
of the money so expended exceeds one hundred dollars ($100) within a calendar year,
to the board of elections within seven (7) days of making the expenditure and to the
campaign treasurer of the candidate or political party committee on whose behalf the
expenditure or contribution was made, or to his or her deputy, within seven (7) days
of making the expenditure. The treasurer or his or her deputy shall cause the expenditures
and expenses to be included in his or her reports to the board of elections. Whether
a person is “acting in concert with any other person or group” for the purposes of
this subsection shall be determined by application of the standards set forth in § 17-25-23.
(c) Any anonymous contribution received by a candidate, campaign treasurer, or deputy
campaign treasurer shall not be used or expended, but shall be returned to the donor,
if the donor’s identity can be ascertained; if not, the contribution shall escheat
to the state.
Notes of Decisions
Nat'l Org. for Marriage v. Daluz, 654 F.3d 115 (1st Cir. 2011).
· cites it 6× “” R.I. Gen. Laws § 17-25-10(b). The report, which is filed on a one-page form provided by the Board, simply requires disclosure of the name and contact information of the person making the expenditure, identification of the candidate or candidates the expenditures were made to…”
Vote Choice, Inc. v. Di Stefano, 814 F. Supp. 195 (D.R.I. 1993).
· cites it 12× “The Ban on Corporate Contributions and Expenditures — § 17-25-10. l(j) R.I.G.L. § 17 — 25—10.1(j) provides: No entity other than an individual, a political action committee which is duly registered and qualified pursuant to the terms of this chapter, political party committee…”
Vote Choice, Inc. v. Di Stefano, 814 F. Supp. 186 (D.R.I. 1992).
· cites it 21× “The Prohibition on Corporate Contributions Although the parties presented no evidence at the October 5th hearing with respect to § 17-25-10. l(j)’s ban on independent corporate contributions and expenditures to influence ballot questions, the plaintiffs’ have raised and…”
Vermont Right to Life Comm., Inc. v. Sorrell, 875 F. Supp. 2d 376 (D. Vt. 2012).
“3d at 120 -21 (citing R.I. Gen. Laws § 17-25-10(b)). Even though independent expenditures were defined as spending uncoordinated with candidates, the Court found no vagueness issue with "on whose behalf.”
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 17-25-10(a) — 1 case
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 17-25-10(a)(3) — 3 cases
Vote Choice, Inc. v. Di Stefano, 814 F. Supp. 195 (D.R.I. 1993).
“The Ban on Corporate Contributions and Expenditures — § 17-25-10. l(j) R.I.G.L. § 17 — 25—10.1(j) provides: No entity other than an individual, a political action committee which is duly registered and qualified pursuant to the terms of this chapter, political party committee…”
Vote Choice, Inc. v. Di Stefano, 814 F. Supp. 186 (D.R.I. 1992).
“The Prohibition on Corporate Contributions Although the parties presented no evidence at the October 5th hearing with respect to § 17-25-10. l(j)’s ban on independent corporate contributions and expenditures to influence ballot questions, the plaintiffs’ have raised and…”
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 17-25-10(b) — 4 cases
Nat'l Org. for Marriage v. Daluz, 654 F.3d 115 (1st Cir. 2011).
“” R.I. Gen. Laws § 17-25-10(b). The report, which is filed on a one-page form provided by the Board, simply requires disclosure of the name and contact information of the person making the expenditure, identification of the candidate or candidates the expenditures were made to…”
Vermont Right to Life Comm., Inc. v. Sorrell, 875 F. Supp. 2d 376 (D. Vt. 2012).
“3d at 120 -21 (citing R.I. Gen. Laws § 17-25-10(b)). Even though independent expenditures were defined as spending uncoordinated with candidates, the Court found no vagueness issue with "on whose behalf.”
Vote Choice, Inc. v. Di Stefano, 814 F. Supp. 195 (D.R.I. 1993).
“The Ban on Corporate Contributions and Expenditures — § 17-25-10. l(j) R.I.G.L. § 17 — 25—10.1(j) provides: No entity other than an individual, a political action committee which is duly registered and qualified pursuant to the terms of this chapter, political party committee…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.