Posted on 09/09/2009 11:23:48 AM PDT by Steelfish
High court tackles 'Hillary: The Movie,' again
It's 'not a musical comedy,' Justice Stephen Breyer says of the film
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court signaled Wednesday it may let businesses and unions spend freely to help their favored political candidates in time for next year's elections.
In a case that began with a movie attacking Hillary Rodham Clinton, newly seated Justice Sonia Sotomayor jumped right into the questioning. She appeared skeptical about taking the far-reaching step of lifting the ban, a move urged on the court by a lawyer for a group that made the 90-minute movie that sought to undermine Clinton's presidential ambitions.
The focus of the case will be on whether two conservatives, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, are willing to overrule earlier decisions that had upheld the restrictions.
Both justices spoke at length in their Senate confirmation hearings about the importance of abiding by precedents — even if they would have voted the other way had they been involved in an earlier decision.
On Wednesday, Alito questioned the basis for blocking corporate and union campaign donations.
More than half the states, including California, Washington and Virginia, allow corporations to make independent campaign expenditures.
"Have they all been overwhelmed by corruption?" Alito asked.
Justice Stephen Breyer expressed doubts about rolling back the requirements. He suggested that to do so might "make a hash" of campaign finance reforms enacted by Congress in 2002.
"Robust debate ... is the most fundamental value" protected by the First Amendment, argued Theodore Olson, the attorney representing Citizens United, the conservative group that made the movie. Olson said the government in this case "has prohibited speech."
Roberts seemed to suggest he's prepared to at least scale back restrictions.
"We don't trust our First Amendment rights to FEC bureaucrats," said the chief.....
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
It's not a dump truck and it's not a beehive, either, Breyer. You're avoiding what it *is*: The First Amendment protecting political speech which you sound like you're going to give a screwball rationalization to ban.
bookmark
Why am I not surprised to find Sonja Sotomayor edging toward fascist oppression in her first public hearing.
Justice Stephen Breyer expressed doubts about rolling back the requirements. He suggested that to do so might “make a hash” of campaign finance reforms enacted by Congress in 2002.
When you have a bunch of Potato Heads, you get hash....
He's getting really warm.....
What’s the sympathy angle here. Those poor Democrats?
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.