« Ind. Decisions - Supreme Court decides one today | Main | Ind. Law - Many new laws go into effect Sunday, July 1; What of the minimum wage law changes? »

Monday, June 25, 2007

Law - "High court ends ban on corporate-funded campaign ads"

David G. Savage of the LA Times posted this story a few minutes ago. Some quotes:

The Supreme Court gave President Bush and Republican leaders two important victories today by clearing the way for corporate-funded broadcast ads before next year's election and by shielding the White House's "faith-based initiative" from challenge in the courts.

Both came in 5-4 rulings led by new Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.

The ruling in the election case is likely to be seen and felt by voters starting early next year. It could mean a return to the 1990s when TV viewers were often urged to "send a message" to an unnamed candidate about his or her stand on a certain issue.

These ads were often paid for with corporate or union money, and they were banned by the McCain-Feingold Act five years ago. The Supreme Court upheld the ban in a 5-4 decision before the 2004 election.

But the high court essentially changed course today and said these issue-oriented ads are legal if they name a candidate running for office, so long as they stop short of urging the public to vote for or against the candidate.

The chief justice said these ads involve "core political speech", which is protected by the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.

"We give the benefit of the doubt to speech, not censorship," Roberts said. He was joined by Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Anthony M. Kennedy. Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas agreed, although they would have gone further and struck down entirely the broadcast ban set in the McCain-Feingold Act. * * *

In the second ruling, the court said taxpayers did not have legal standing to challenge Bush's "faith-based initiative." The decision throws out a lawsuit brought by a Wisconsin group that said Bush was promoting religion in violation of the 1st Amendment. * * *

In a third ruling, the court gave school principals the authority to discipline students who advocate the use of illegal drugs at schools. Roberts said the court was not rejecting the notion that high school students had free-speech rights, but rather making clear that these rights were limited, especially when students advocated in favor of illegal drugs.

The decision reversed a free-speech ruling in favor of a high school student from Juneau, Alaska, who had been suspended for holding up a banner that read "Bong hits for Jesus."

The first case was FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life. Terre Haute attorney James Bopp represented WRTL. SCOTUSblog has posted a number of entries today on this ruling.

The second case is Hein v. Freedom from Religion. The third is Morse v. Frederick.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on June 25, 2007 03:14 PM
Posted to General Law Related