Supreme Court Loosens Restrictions On Election Ads

Posted on June 25, 2007

The Supreme Court loosened restrictions Monday on corporate- and union-funded television ads that air close to elections, weakening a key provision of a landmark campaign finance law.

The court, split 5-4, upheld an appeals court ruling that an anti-abortion group should have been allowed to air ads during the final two months before the 2004 elections.

The case involved advertisements that Wisconsin Right to Life was prevented from broadcasting. The ads asked voters to contact the state’s two senators, Democrats Russ Feingold and Herb Kohl, and urge them not to filibuster President Bush’s judicial nominees.

Feingold, a co-author of the campaign finance law, was up for re-election in 2004.

The provision in question was aimed at preventing the airing of issue ads that cast candidates in positive or negative lights while stopping short of explicitly calling for their election or defeat. Sponsors of such ads have contended they are exempt from certain limits on contributions in federal elections.

Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by his conservative allies, wrote a majority opinion upholding the appeals court ruling.

The Justices were divided on just how far they were willing to let the ads go. The ruling in this case makes sense to me. It opens doors on both sides for sure. It adds a bit more to just how interesting the upcoming elections will be.

Mitt Romney is right on in his statement. Score one for free speech!

“Score one for free speech. Today the Supreme Court reaffirmed the First
Amendment by rejecting a key feature of McCain-Feingold. The law
trampled the basic right of the American people to participate in their
democracy. It also purported to reduce the influence of money in
politics, but we now know that influence is greater than ever.
McCain-Feingold was a poorly-crafted bill. Today’s decision restores, in
part, to the American people a right critical to their freedom of
political participation and expression.”