Posted on 12/21/2006 3:27:18 PM PST by Jim Robinson
Today the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia held that the ban on corporate electioneering communications is unconstitutional as applied to the three grassroots lobbying ads for which Wisconsin Right to Life ("WRTL") sought judicial relief in WRTL v. FEC. Judge Leon wrote the opinion and was joined by Judge Sentelle in the majority of the three-judge court.
The ads were run in 2004 when WRTL did radio and television ads urging people in Wisconsin to contact Senator Kohl and Senator Feingold and ask them to oppose the ongoing filibusters of President Bush's judicial nominees. Because Senator Feingold was a candidate, WRTL had to stop running its ads when the electioneering communication prohibition period began. WRTL sought judicial relief to continue running its ads, which was denied at the time.
Today the District Court first decided that the grassroots lobbying ads were not the functional equivalent of express advocacy, as the U.S. Supreme Court had required in its analysis in McConnell v. FEC (which upheld the electioneering communication only against a facial challenge). Second, the District Court held that the FEC had not met its burden of proving that the prohibition was narrowly tailored to a compelling state interest as applied to the ads. So the Court held that the prohibition was unconstitutional as applied to these ads.
James Bopp, Jr., attorney for WRTL comments: "This is a victory for the right of the people to lobby their members of Congress on upcoming votes even if there is a pending election. This grassroots lobbying is simply self-government at work, which is protected by the First Amendment."
The opinion is available on the district court's website at http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/opinions/district-court-2006.html.
James Bopp, Jr. has a national campaign finance and election law practice. He is General Counsel for the James Madison Center for Free Speech.
PRESS RELEASE
November 14, 2006
Contact: James Bopp, Jr.
Phone 812/232-2434; Fax 812/235-3685
jboppjr@aol.com
this will hang around his neck in the primaries. he's toast. Yippee!
BTTT ;*)
Whoa! Early Christmas present? Let's hope it doesn't get re-gifted by SCOTUS.
Well, well, well... MERRY CHRISTMAS!!
Seriously wondering if his torture and imprisonment during Vietnam didn't have long-term affects or some sort of brain-washing that would cause him to support something like this. I can excuse Feingold; he's a democrat. And unless McCain was the victim of brainwashing that would make him systematically destroy the basis of our Democracy (Free Speech and right to criticize and bring to task those who hold public office), then he's just a deluded fool I can never support for public office.
Also worried that this ruling doesn't overturn entire part prohibiting criticism of candidates before an election.
I agree completely with your assessment of McCain, but I don't want anyone to think that Feingold is anything more than an opportunist and partisan hack.
I literally have a folder 2 inches thick of letters he (actually, they were probably written by one of his lackeys) sent to me in response to requests I made to him in writing that he uphold the Constitution and the rights of all citizens, born and those to be born. He and the other senator in my state (who bought his position), feel abortion and hobbling free speech, unless it's the right kind of speech by the right kind of people, is perfectly fine, although neither was willing to place the issue in referendum form so they could truly see how their constituents feel about their rights being stolen from them one at a time.
I fear the collapse of our culture, sincerely !
God bless our nation....please !
EODGUY
I'ma dummy when it comes to stuff like this- will this give Church voting booths the right to campaign or even have 'religious symbols' uncovered in their churches during elections as well? or No? http://sacredscoop.com
MCINSANE's law cost the GOP Congress.
JimRob,
Wonder if Judge Leon or Judge Sentelle are FReeper/FRlukers?
:~)
Live Long and Prosper, JimRob!
Is not this what the NRA argued before in its AMicus Brief aganist free speech. And the USSC just ignored them. Ginsberg said the NRA was an ideological group. Whatever that means to her. I guess a group she disagrees with. I wonder if she would therefore admit as a high ranking member of the ACLU that she was a member of an ideological group. Of coarse NOT.
Great news!
Liberty's call cannot be ignored in the face of this law. It is an bad, evil law, and is just one MORE reason McPain will never be president.
It's a travesty that Congress passed McCain-Feingold. It's a travesty that Bush signed McCain-Feingold. And it's a travesty that SCOTUS upheld McCain-Feingold.There is however the possibility that the replacement of O'Connor with Alito might flip that 5-4 SCOTUS decision in a rehearing.
One of the worst, anti-constitutional laws we've ever seen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.