Justices may rule soon on campaign-finance case

Washington Post ^ | January 9, 2010 | Robert Barnes

[neverdem]

After a holiday break, the Supreme Court returned to work Friday with unfinished business at hand, some of its toughest cases ahead and a looming decision that could rock the national political landscape in this year of midterm congressional elections.

The justices met privately to pick through the stack of review requests that accumulated since their last public session Dec. 14. And they will begin a new round of oral arguments on Monday in which Justice Sonia Sotomayor will probably play a prominent role.

But it is an old case that is puzzling court observers and consuming the political world: a pending decision on whether restrictions on corporate and labor union spending on political campaigns violate the First Amendment...

--snip--

The new year will bring at least a few new cases to a docket that is mostly full -- the court traditionally stops hearing oral arguments in April. The court has already taken at least one case that will command the nation's attention: whether the Second Amendment right to personal ownership of firearms that rendered unconstitutional the handgun ban in the federal enclave of Washington also applies to state and city attempts to severely restrict gun ownership.

--snip--

Sotomayor's influence is outsized in Briscoe v. Virginia because David H. Souter, the justice she replaced, was in the majority of the 5 to 4 ruling that defendants have the right to question crime lab analysts about the reports they produce.

[heiss]

cfr..the grandchild of mccain and fred thompson..these rinos truly are disgrace for gop..

[Buckeye McFrog]

judging from all of the sulking coming from the KosKids out there it looks like SCOTUS may finally toss this turkey

[Still Thinking]

On the one hand, to see CFR killed would be a true joy. On the other hand, cases that can affect how campaigns are financed just when the Dems are potentially on the ropes smell VERY fishy to me. They probably want to tap George Soros for $200 mil or so for the midterms, and need a rule change. I’d be equally disturbed to see cases opposing ID verification to vote laws start popping up.