UPDATE on Brenda Namigadde: Deportation delayed by temporary injunction

As I noted here earlier, Ugandan lesbian Brenda Namigadde — who fled to the U.K. in 2002 to escape persecution in her home country where homosexuality is outlawed with those who break that law subject to up to 14 years in prison — was scheduled to be sent back to Uganda at 9 p.m. tonight (London time). But word now is that a High Court judge has granted a temporary injunction preventing her deportation, according to reports by BBC.

Namigadde’s earlier pleas for asylum in the U.K. had been denied after a judge said there was no evidence she is a lesbian.

Efforts to halt Namigadde’s deportation took on added urgency on Wednesdays after news broke of the murder of Uganda’s most prominent gay rights activist, David Kato.

—  admin

Minn. judge upholds law that revealed Target donation

MARTIGA LOHN | Associated Press

ST. PAUL, Minn. — A federal judge refused on Monday, Sept. 20 to interfere with a new Minnesota law that revealed political donations from Target Corp. and other companies, saying the public has an interest in knowing who speaks and who pays for those messages as the election approaches.

U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank denied a temporary injunction in a lawsuit brought by supporters of Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer, including an anti-abortion group and an anti-tax organization. They sued to overturn the law on free speech grounds and had asked Frank to suspend the disclosure requirements immediately.

Frank answered with a firm no.

“Invalidating the election laws at issue here would likely result in corporations making independent expenditures without any reporting or disclosure on the eve of the upcoming general election on November 2, 2010,” his ruling said. “This result so close to the election would clearly harm the state, Minnesota voters, and the general public interest.”

That came the day before independent political funds, including those collecting corporate dollars, are required to file their latest campaign finance reports with state regulators. They must list donors who gave more than $100 and show how they’re spending their money.

The law was enacted in May after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling early this year freed businesses to spend company money on elections, overturning restrictions on corporate political spending in about half the states, including Minnesota. State lawmakers responded by enacting disclosure requirements so that corporate campaign spending would be public.

The lawsuit from Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, the Taxpayers League of Minnesota and a travel agency contended that the reporting requirements were so burdensome that they amounted to a ban on free speech.

During election years, businesses and independent groups must submit five reports and disclose large donations within 24 hours for the three weeks leading up to the primary and the last two weeks before the general election. In off years, one report is required. The registration requirement is triggered when businesses or independent funds spend more than $100. Penalties for violations can be as high as $25,000.

Frank said the state law does not restrict corporations from spending freely on political speech as long as they follow the disclosure requirements.

“The law at issue here is not a ban, but rather a disclosure law,” his ruling said.

Joe La Rue, the Terre Haute, Ind.-based attorney for the groups that sued, had no immediate comment.

Attorney General Lori Swanson said the decision will help voters.

“This ruling lets average voters know who is financing elections in Minnesota,” she said in a statement.

The lawsuit also challenged the state’s prohibition on corporations contributing directly to candidates and political parties. But Frank said that ban wasn’t invalidated by the Supreme Court ruling, which revolved around with corporate independent expenditures made with the input or knowledge of candidates or political parties.

Target’s donation attracted national attention because it seemed to conflict with the company’s gay-friendly reputation. The Minneapolis-based retailer donated $150,000 to MN Forward, a business-oriented political fund supporting Emmer, an outspoken opponent of gay marriage, in the governor’s race.

—  John Wright

Groups challenging law that revealed donations by Target, Best Buy to anti-gay candidate

MARTIGA LOHN  |  Associated Press

ST. PAUL, Minn. — The future of a new Minnesota law that let the public know about polarizing political donations from Target Corp., Best Buy Co. and other companies rests with a federal judge who will decide whether to suspend the disclosure requirement on free speech grounds.

U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank said Friday, Aug. 20 he will rule within a month on a request for a temporary injunction to suspend the law, which could free corporations and other independent groups to spend on this year’s election without revealing their identities. Abortion opponents Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, the anti-tax Taxpayers League of Minnesota and a travel agency brought the lawsuit last month.

Their attorney, Joe La Rue of Terre Haute, Ind., said Minnesota’s disclosure requirements for independent spending are so onerous that they amount to an unconstitutional ban on free speech. Under a law that took effect June 1, Minnesota makes corporations and other independent political groups register with state campaign finance regulators. They’re also required to file public reports naming their donors and itemizing their expenditures five times this year.

“These are the burdens that the Supreme Court said you cannot put on people who want to exercise their free speech rights,” La Rue said during a three-hour hearing.

State Solicitor General Alan Gilbert said the law doesn’t block corporations and independent groups from spending unlimited amounts, as long as they disclose their spending. He said the public debate over Target’s donation shows that the law works.

Under the new law, a business-oriented political fund called MN Forward collected more than $1 million since June, including $150,000 from Target. When MN Forward disclosed its donors as required twice last month, Target became the focus of a national backlash from liberals and gay rights supporters because of MN Forward’s support for Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer, a vocal gay marriage opponent.

“The public has a compelling interest in information regarding sources of political spending so they can make informed decisions in the political marketplace,” Gilbert said.

The Legislature unanimously passed the disclosure law after a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling allowed corporations to spend company funds directly on elections, wiping away prohibitions on corporate campaign spending in Minnesota and about half the states. The statute applies to independent expenditures, or those made without a candidate’s input or knowledge.

In Target’s case, the company wasn’t required to disclose the donation, but MN Forward was. But the new law allows companies themselves to spend on campaigns if they register and follow the disclosure requirements.

La Rue said the law requires corporations to account separately for such political spending, violating their right to spend general corporate funds on elections.

Frank interrupted the attorneys frequently with technical questions, at one point asking both sides whether a temporary injunction would mean the end of disclosure for this election cycle.

Assistant Hennepin County Attorney Dan Rogan said lifting the law could lead to a flood of corporate money into the election in October, without voters knowing who was behind the messages. Minnesotans will elect a new governor and the entire Legislature in November.

If the law is struck down, the earliest that the Legislature could replace it would be next year.

—  John Wright