SCOTUS has agreed to hear a case involving whether a movie that had been intended to oppose Hillary Clinton’s presidential aspirations (remember those?) can be regulated as a campaign ad.
Now, the whole thing seems pretty moot now, I mean, can you even remember the Democratic primaries at this point? And the Supremes have every right to say that this is irrelevant at this point. But the implications are far reaching.
Basically, the McCain-Feingold Act (yes, if the last election had gone the other way, we would still have plenty of First Amendment related concerns out there) requires disclosure of donors and prohibits corporate funded broadcast ads attacking a candidate within a month of a primary or general election. The group that created this movie, Lawyers for Citizens United, is arguing that this restriction is an unconstitutional infringement on their First Amendment rights, taking us back to the days of “government censorship and book burnings.” The lower court has thus far disagreed.
Stay tuned.
Post a Comment