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

Skip to comments.

Roberts airs doubts on campaign-finance law
Washington Times ^ | January 18, 2006 | ASSOCIATED PRESS

Posted on 01/18/2006 5:57:23 AM PST by .cnI redruM

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. expressed doubts yesterday about legal restrictions on political ads by outside groups as the Supreme Court took up a new challenge to the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law.

Questioning Solicitor General Paul D. Clement, who was defending the law, Chief Justice Roberts raised a hypothetical case in which a group runs an issue ad every month. Does the ad, he asked, become illegal in the months before an election? Mr. Clement responded that such a group could continue to run the ads if it used political action committee money to pay for them, or if it refrained from identifying a candidate by name.

But Justice Antonin Scalia said that would undercut the purpose of the ad, adding, "The point of an issue ad is to put pressure on an incumbent you want to vote your way."

At issue is a provision banning the use of corporate or union money for ads that identify federal candidates two months before a general election. The case involves a lawsuit by Wisconsin Right to Life, which was barred from broadcasting ads that mentioned Sen. Russell D. Feingold, Wisconsin Democrat, during his 2004 re-election campaign.

(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 1stamendment; cfr; findgold; mcpain; roberts; robertscourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last
It's cool when we actually have a SCOTUS Judge who takes umberage at McCain and Feingold's assault on The First Amendment.
1 posted on 01/18/2006 5:57:27 AM PST by .cnI redruM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

Will Ann Coulter the skank eat crow?


2 posted on 01/18/2006 6:00:13 AM PST by nwrep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

But I thought that the 1st only protected free speach... Oh wait, I get it now.


3 posted on 01/18/2006 6:02:44 AM PST by benjamin032
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: benjamin032

It protects speech we pay for as well.


4 posted on 01/18/2006 6:03:58 AM PST by .cnI redruM (Shame, not sanctions - UN policy on Iran)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nwrep

I think Coulter's arguments were valid. I supported Roberts, but couldn't fault her logic. She's right. A lot of conservative judges HAVE become liberals on the court. But I'm still glad he's there and that likely Alito will follow.


5 posted on 01/18/2006 6:04:40 AM PST by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nwrep
Will Ann Coulter the skank eat crow?

Let's wait and see how he rules on the case before demanding that Ann eat crow. And having seen and talked to Ann C in person, I can assure you that your characterization of her as a skank is about as far off base as if you had speculated what "hillary the babe" thought about it.

6 posted on 01/18/2006 6:05:09 AM PST by VRWCmember
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nwrep

Will George Bush ever be criticized for signing this bad law?


7 posted on 01/18/2006 6:06:17 AM PST by Sometimes A River (The problem with Neo-Cons is that they are for unlimited Third World Immigration.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: VRWCmember
I can assure you that your characterization of her as a skank is about as far off base as if you had speculated what "hillary the babe" thought about it.

You are probably right about that. I was very defensive re: ROberts when she attacked him unfairly.

8 posted on 01/18/2006 6:06:43 AM PST by nwrep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: nwrep

Or the Bush Administration lawyer that is defending this law in Court?


9 posted on 01/18/2006 6:07:20 AM PST by Sometimes A River (The problem with Neo-Cons is that they are for unlimited Third World Immigration.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Acts 2:38
I would hope so. That and the odious Prescription Drug Panderation Act. He needs to find that veto pen that the White House dog ran off with.
10 posted on 01/18/2006 6:08:10 AM PST by .cnI redruM (Shame, not sanctions - UN policy on Iran)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

He's not interested in finding his veto pen.

He is all for Campaign Finance Reform, Prescrption Drug Entitlements, New Federal Education spending, huge budget deficits, ad nauseum.


11 posted on 01/18/2006 6:10:16 AM PST by Sometimes A River (The problem with Neo-Cons is that they are for unlimited Third World Immigration.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. expressed doubts yesterday about legal restrictions on political ads by outside groups as the Supreme Court took up a new challenge to the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law.

GET ALITO ON THE COURT AND LET'S GUT THIS PIECE OF CRAP "LAW"!!

12 posted on 01/18/2006 6:11:47 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Acts 2:38

Bush has been criticized for signing the law...even by people like me who still strongly support him. He's still a better man than anyone the 'rats would put up: including Hillary.


13 posted on 01/18/2006 6:13:52 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: nwrep
"Will Ann Coulter the skank eat crow?"

Firstly, while you were playing Nintendo or watching 'Buffy the Vampire,' Ann Coulter was one of the few conservative warriors willing to withstand and dismantle the liberal onslaught during the Clinton years.

As to your snide insinuation that Miss Coulter must "eat crow" because she questioned the conservative bonafides of Justice Roberts, guess what? The jury is STILL out on him as to just how "conservative." he actually is.

Quite frankly, many of us questioned the integrity and motives of Dubya for trying to slip in an unqualified even MORE unknown quantity like Harriet (just-trust-me) Miers.

14 posted on 01/18/2006 6:14:25 AM PST by F16Fighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nwrep
There are ules that must be followed...


15 posted on 01/18/2006 6:14:38 AM PST by pageonetoo (You'll spot their posts soon enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nwrep

rules...


16 posted on 01/18/2006 6:15:24 AM PST by pageonetoo (You'll spot their posts soon enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

That's the problem with "Bush may have done some bad things, but he's still better than ____"

With that logic, we'll never have someone in there who is a true conservative.

Not that I am under any illusion that we ever will...too many Republicans are all for Republican versions of Socialism.


17 posted on 01/18/2006 6:15:36 AM PST by Sometimes A River (The problem with Neo-Cons is that they are for unlimited Third World Immigration.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
GET ALITO ON THE COURT AND LET'S GUT THIS PIECE OF CRAP "LAW"!!

Roberts and Thomas don't seem to agree with each other on some issues.  What makes you think Alito would see things your way?

18 posted on 01/18/2006 6:19:09 AM PST by Racehorse (Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Acts 2:38
Will George Bush ever be criticized for signing this bad law?

Yes, he has been thoroughly chastised for not vetoing it. He assumed the SCOTUS would not allow it - regardless he was wrong to have signed it. This bill not only assaulted the First Amendment, it has allowed Special Interests to trump over the people - Special Interest is running the Alito nomination and the Democrats. I hope the court will overturn this abominable law; it is totally unconstitutional.

19 posted on 01/18/2006 6:19:54 AM PST by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: F16Fighter

"Will Ann Coulter the skank eat crow?"
Is that protected speach too? What if she were running for office next month?


20 posted on 01/18/2006 6:20:34 AM PST by benjamin032
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-76 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