Companies doing business with state and local governments or operating in regulated industries are subject to a dizzying array of “pay-to-play” rules.  These rules effectively prohibit company executives and employees (and in some cases, their family members) from making certain personal political contributions.  Even inadvertent violations can be dangerous:  a single political contribution can, for

Perhaps no industry faces more scrutiny and regulation of its political activities than the financial services industry.   Even though these rules are often not intuitive, failure to comply with them can result in big penalties, loss of business, and debilitating reputational consequences.  In this advisory, we describe three sometimes overlooked political law related risks

New Jersey is well-known for having strict, comprehensive, and complex pay-to-play laws.  Two new changes to an annual pay-to-play filing required of some government contractors will only enhance that reputation.

State law requires a company that receives $50,000 annually through government contracts in New Jersey to file a report by March 30 of the following

The Wagner case, decided today by the D.C. Circuit, is important because of its analysis of the constitutionality of federal campaign contribution restrictions and, by extension, of pay-to-play laws generally. Covington has been monitoring this case since the district court decision in 2012, to the argument before the D.C. Circuit in 2013, and the decision

Despite potential vulnerabilities, Hawaii’s pay-to-play law survived a significant challenge in the Ninth Circuit last week.  The matter involved an electrical-construction company, its CEO and a second individual who challenged several sections of Hawaii’s campaign finance law, including a requirement that the company register and report its activities once it crossed a $1,000 threshold, and

Earlier this week, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie vetoed key aspects of a bill that would have imposed new restrictions on the ability of national and federal political party committees to raise money from Wall Street and financial executives.  The bill, as we have previously discussed, sought to apply the state’s notoriously stringent pay-to-play

A little-noticed sentence in a bill sitting on New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s desk could, if it becomes law, threaten to curtail the ability of national party committees to raise money from Wall Street and financial industry executives.  The Republican and Democratic Governors Associations, the Republican National Committee, the Democratic National Committee, and the federal

New Jersey, already home to some of the most complex and restrictive pay-to-play laws in the nation, is considering an aggressive new expansion of those laws.  A bill under consideration that recently passed through a senate committee would prohibit certain individuals and entities involved in managing state employee retirement funds from making contributions to national,

Connecticut’s campaign finance regulator, the State Elections Enforcement Commission (“SEEC”) recently released an important advisory opinion that made clear that a state contractor that is otherwise barred from giving to a state political party under Connecticut’s pay-to-play law can give to the party’s federal account, a point SEEC staff had previously addressed.  However, the

Last spring, we reported that the New Jersey Attorney General charged seven executives and shareholders of Birdsall Services Group, an engineering firm, with participating in a massive pay-to-play scheme.  The scheme allegedly involved a multi-year attempt by company executives and major shareholders to evade state level pay-to-play restrictions by making and then reimbursing political contributions