Compliance Notes - Vol. 7, Issue 8
RECENT LOBBYING, ETHICS & CAMPAIGN FINANCE UPDATES
Campaign Finance & Lobbying Compliance
Colorado: The Colorado Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday, April 21, 2026, on whether the state’s requirement that ballot measure committees disclose their registered agent’s name on political advertisements violates the First Amendment. The case arises from a 2020 campaign by No on EE — A Bad Deal for Colorado, an issue committee primarily funded by tobacco company Liggett Vector Brands that opposed Proposition EE, a state nicotine tax measure. No on EE spent more than $3 million on communications without listing its registered agent before correcting the omission after a voter complaint, and was fined $30,000 by the deputy secretary of state. The Colorado Court of Appeals struck down the disclosure requirement as facially unconstitutional, finding the state had not shown a substantial relationship between the government’s interest in informing voters and the disclosure of a registered agent’s name. Colorado is the only state to require such a disclosure on election communications. Several justices appeared skeptical of that ruling during oral arguments, suggesting that a registered agent’s identity could provide voters meaningful information about who is behind a ballot measure. (Michael Karlik, Colorado Politics)
Wisconsin: A federal judge sentenced Roger Hoffman, a 70-year-old former Wisconsin man who renounced his U.S. citizenship in 2009, to 20 months in prison on Wednesday, April 22, 2026, for funneling illegal contributions into U.S. political campaigns as a foreign national. U.S. District Judge James Peterson also ordered Hoffman to pay a $150,000 fine and admonished him for what he called “a resolute pattern of dishonesty.” Hoffman pleaded guilty in September 2025 to a single count of making illegal campaign contributions, admitting that prosecutors could prove he made approximately $345,000 in illegal federal campaign contributions between 2010 and 2020. Court records show he moved more than $400,000 into state and federal elections over more than a decade, using an assistant as a conduit to circumvent laws prohibiting foreign nationals from donating to U.S. elections. Court documents indicate the funds went to federal and Wisconsin candidates and political parties, but do not identify specific recipients. (Todd Richmond, AP News)
Government Ethics & Transparency
Louisiana: A Louisiana Senate bill would redact the street addresses of political donors from public campaign finance reports and block their release in response to public records requests. The restriction would be more stringent than those in Texas and California, which redact addresses online but release them upon request. Senate Bill 495, sponsored by Sen. Caleb Kleinpeter (R-Port Allen), builds on 2025 campaign finance changes that rolled back transparency requirements and expanded permissible uses of campaign funds. The bill also raises more than 30 minimum dollar thresholds that trigger public reporting requirements, including increasing the registration threshold for political campaign groups from $1,000 to $5,000 per year. Supporters argue the address redactions protect donors’ privacy and First Amendment rights, while critics note that street addresses help verify donor identities and detect coordinated political contributions. The Louisiana Board of Ethics has raised staffing concerns about executing the redactions, noting that it is already strained by a separate 2025 law that allows elected officials to request the removal of their personal information from ethics board filings. (Julie O’Donoghue, Louisiana Illuminator)
Vermont: Vermont’s House Ethics Panel dismissed complaints against five state representatives who traveled to Israel in September 2025 on a trip organized by Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and funded by the Israeli government at approximately $6,500 per participant. The complaints were filed in December 2025 by the executive director of Jewish Voice for Peace Vermont-New Hampshire. The complaints alleged the lawmakers violated the state Code of Ethics by accepting free airfare, lodging and meals from a foreign government for an event whose chief purpose was lobbying, and by creating an appearance of unethical conduct tied to a pending state bill on antisemitism. The bipartisan, five-member panel found no reasonable grounds to believe an ethical violation occurred, concluding the trip qualified as a widely attended cultural, political and civic event and that the expenses were permissible gifts under the ethics code. The panel also found that remarks by Israel’s Foreign Affairs Minister urging conference participants to advance pro-Israel legislation in their home states could not, retroactively, render the trip impermissible, as they were beyond the lawmakers’ control. The panel acknowledged that additional guidance on gift provisions would be useful and said it was committed to working with the Vermont State Ethics Commission to develop such guidelines, though the commission’s executive director said as of Tuesday that no contact had been made. (Hannah Bassett, Seven Days)
We read the news, cut through the noise and provide you the notes.
Compliance Notes from Nossaman’s Government Relations & Regulation Group is a periodic digest of the headlines, statutory and regulatory changes and court cases involving campaign finance, lobbying compliance, election law and government ethics issues at the federal, state and local level. Our attorneys, policy advisors and compliance consultants are available to discuss any questions or how specific issues may impact your business. If there is a particular subject or jurisdiction you’d like to see covered, please let us know.
