Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. Court strikes down part of McCain-Feingold Campaign Law

Posted on 05/02/2003 12:41:01 PM PDT by RandDisciple

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 221-226 next last
To: Oldeconomybuyer
"The court made its ruling effective immediately, barring the Federal Election Commission from enforcing the restrictions it struck down. "

Sounds like someone would have to file for a 'stay' in order for this to NOT go into effect immediately.
101 posted on 05/02/2003 1:14:52 PM PDT by justshe (I'm #6 on the top ten list of lairs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Wphile
and can't be used as a stupid campaign issue.

Yeah, they can't say that Bush wouldn't sign it into law...... : )

102 posted on 05/02/2003 1:15:20 PM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
The one judge who upheld the entire law happened to be a Bill Clinton appointee.

Gee...what a surprise. Goes to show how important those judicial appointments are!!

103 posted on 05/02/2003 1:15:39 PM PDT by Wphile (Keep the UN out of Iraq)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Wphile
I disagree that he did the right thing. It is never the right thing to sign an unconstitutional law. But right now it doesn't matter. He got lucky, but it isn't over until the SCOTUS sings. I think we will be okay there.
104 posted on 05/02/2003 1:15:46 PM PDT by RAT Patrol (Congress can give one American a dollar only by first taking it away from another American. -W.W.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: RAT Patrol
it isn't over until the SCOTUS sings. I think we will be okay there.

Of that, really, I'm about 99.99% positive! : )

105 posted on 05/02/2003 1:16:24 PM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Thank god for the constitution again!
106 posted on 05/02/2003 1:16:45 PM PDT by hoosiermama (Prayers for all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: RandDisciple
Thank God...
107 posted on 05/02/2003 1:17:19 PM PDT by July 4th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wphile
Until we have the opinions, we have no idea what the dissenter dissented on. I think it's most unlikely he would have upheld the whole act.
108 posted on 05/02/2003 1:17:20 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: RAT Patrol
I agree. The President let us all down by signing an unconstitutional law. His veto would have probably been sustained. Our entire political system has suffered a black eye since our politicians showed they could not give a damn about the Constitution. I'm sure if our Congresscritters thought they could repeal the First Amendment a majority of them probably would vote today to get rid of it.
109 posted on 05/02/2003 1:18:21 PM PDT by goldstategop ( In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Dog
You see, the left and their RINOenablers wanted to maintain unlimited free speech for Sarandon, Robbins, Garaffalo, Ferrel, et al who could get free media attention because of their "celebrity", but place hard limits on ordinary folks who were forced to pay cash for their "free" speech.
110 posted on 05/02/2003 1:18:36 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer (The democRATS are near the tipping point.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: All
link to opinions.
111 posted on 05/02/2003 1:18:53 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: RAT Patrol
It is never the right thing to sign an unconstitutional law.

Well, in principle I agree but in practical terms, since politicians aren't necessarily the sharpest tools in the shed, how do we know if something is unconstitutional until it is ruled as such. Of course, we all knew it was unconstitutional but the dems and McCain certainly didn't think so. Ergo, a ruling was necessary to settle the issue.

112 posted on 05/02/2003 1:18:55 PM PDT by Wphile (Keep the UN out of Iraq)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Wphile
The ruling came from a special three-member, fast-track panel of Appeals Court Judge Karen Henderson, District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly and District Judge Richard Leon.

The votes were 2-1 so some idiot wanted to uphold it.

Guess who?

Judge Karen Henderson - appointed by G. H. W. Bush

Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly - appointed by Clinton

Judge Richard Leon - appointed by G. W. Bush

113 posted on 05/02/2003 1:20:48 PM PDT by jackbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
In a 2-1 vote, the court ruled that political parties can raise corporate and union contributions for general party-building activities such as get-out-the-vote drives and voter registration but cannot use it for issue advertising.

So advertising can still only be run using hard money. That largely favors the GOP.

114 posted on 05/02/2003 1:21:24 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
But, but, but...I thought they were just speaking as "average americans!" And poor tim robbins was bemoaning the lack of free speech. Yep, he said it and he even said it on national TV in front of the National Press Club!

These hollywood yahoos are such frickin' idiots, it's nauseating. Don't talk to be about free speech buddy as you're talking away on national TV while I can't even get a letter to the editor printed. AAARRRGHHH!

115 posted on 05/02/2003 1:21:36 PM PDT by Wphile (Keep the UN out of Iraq)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: aristeides; All
another link:

Reform Update:

President Bush's signing of the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act of 2002 is far from the end of the reform story. The coming months will see several court challenges to the new law, as well as efforts by the Federal Election Commission to write the rules that will determine how much of the law works in the real world. Watch this space to keep track of developments on these two fronts.

116 posted on 05/02/2003 1:21:54 PM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: RAT Patrol
The sarcasm was directed at the liberal media and NOT you.

Sorry if there was any misunderstanding at all. You just happened to be the guy I hit reply to. Sorry!

I am happy the hard money is doubled through Bushes' strategy, so that hard working middle class people can re elect him!
117 posted on 05/02/2003 1:22:26 PM PDT by fooman (Get real with Kim Jung Mentally Ill about proliferation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Don't Congresscritters take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution? How does passing unConstitutional laws fit into such an oath? For that matter, the President does for sure take such an oath. He should be ashamed for having signed an obviously flawed bill into law.
118 posted on 05/02/2003 1:22:27 PM PDT by PeoplesRepublicOfWashington
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: jackbill
Hmmm...let me guess. The clinton appointee?
119 posted on 05/02/2003 1:22:33 PM PDT by Wphile (Keep the UN out of Iraq)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
...our senators knew the entire time what they voted for was flatly unconstitutional. It doesn't say much for their respect for the Constitution and the rule of law, now does it?

It took the wedge issue out of McPain's campaign. The neo-com's and media used it to monopolize political reporting (as they do with abortion). Equal time equaled neo-coms ranting about conservatives and abortion then equal time to McPain ranting about contributions.

yitbos

120 posted on 05/02/2003 1:22:37 PM PDT by bruinbirdman (Buy low, sell high)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 221-226 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson