No Labels: A Centrist Group Stirring Controversy in the 2024 Presidential Race

As the 2024 presidential election looms on the horizon, a centrist group called No Labels has thrust itself into the spotlight, sparking controversy and raising concerns among political observers. The group’s potential third-party bid for the presidency has sent shockwaves through the political landscape, prompting two Democratic-aligned groups to file campaign finance complaints against No Labels, seeking to restrict its access to campaign funds and subject it to the same rules as formal political parties. This legal battle sets the stage for a fascinating showdown that could significantly impact the upcoming election.

The No Labels Group and Its Political Stance

No Labels presents itself as a “common sense” centrist political organization that seeks to bridge the partisan divide and promote bipartisan solutions to pressing issues. The group boasts bipartisan support and claims to have members from both sides of the political spectrum. However, No Labels is registered as a nonprofit with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rather than a formal political party. This distinction allows No Labels to operate with limited transparency and accept unlimited donations from anonymous sources, a practice commonly referred to as “dark money.”

Campaign Finance Complaints Against No Labels

The complaints filed by End Citizens United and Accountable.US target No Labels’ opaque funding structure and its activities, which the groups argue violate campaign finance laws. The complaints aim to:

• Force No Labels to register as a formal political party with the Federal Election Commission (FEC).


• Revoke No Labels’ tax-exempt status.


• Compel No Labels to adhere to the same donation amount limits as other political parties.


• Require No Labels to disclose its major donors.

The complaints allege that No Labels’ activities, such as running ads opposing President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump, constitute more than 50% of its overall activities, violating IRS rules for political nonprofits. Additionally, the groups claim that No Labels primarily engages in opposing the candidacies of Biden and Trump, which goes against IRS regulations prohibiting activities that primarily benefit a private party.

Legal Challenges and Enforcement Hurdles

The success of these complaints faces significant challenges due to the reluctance of regulatory bodies like the FEC and the IRS to take action against groups that push the boundaries of campaign finance laws. The FEC board, split between Democrat and Republican appointees, often reaches deadlocks, while the IRS has shown restraint in enforcement since the backlash faced during attempts to scrutinize tea party groups under the Obama administration.

Arguments Made by Democratic Groups

The Democratic groups’ complaints rest on several legal arguments:

• End Citizens United argues that No Labels’ political activities appear to constitute more than 50% of its overall activities, violating IRS rules for political nonprofits.


• The group claims that No Labels primarily engages in opposing the candidacies of Joe Biden and Donald Trump, which goes against IRS regulations prohibiting activities that primarily benefit a private party.


• Accountable.US contends that No Labels has failed to file quarterly campaign finance reports as required by Colorado law, where the group has qualified for party status.

The groups argue that No Labels is essentially acting as a political party without registering as one, gaining an unfair advantage by avoiding the same rules and regulations that govern formal political parties.

No Labels’ Response

No Labels has refuted the allegations of wrongdoing and dismissed the complaints as part of a coordinated attempt to undermine its ballot access and limit Americans’ choices. The group’s chief strategist, Ryan Clancy, cites a federal case, Unity08 v. FEC, as precedent for its approach, arguing that No Labels is not required to register as a political committee as long as it does not actively support a specific candidate.

Expert Opinions on the Legal Arguments

Campaign finance experts have weighed in on the legal arguments presented by the Democratic groups, providing varying perspectives:

• Adav Noti, executive director of the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center, believes the Democratic groups have a strong argument. He emphasizes that No Labels’ actions would typically qualify them as a political party under normal circumstances.


• However, Noti acknowledges that No Labels’ attempt to avoid registering as a political party by not advocating for a specific candidate is a “too cute” argument that may not hold up in court.

Conclusion

The controversy surrounding No Labels and its potential impact on the 2024 presidential election highlights the challenges in regulating campaign finance in the face of creative interpretations of the law. The outcome of the legal battles between No Labels and the Democratic groups will determine the group’s ability to continue its activities and potentially influence the upcoming election. Whether No Labels will be able to navigate the legal hurdles and emerge as a significant player in the 2024 race remains to be seen.