U.S. Court strikes down part of McCain-Feingold Campaign Law

[Mo1]

Well it was a stupid law IMO

[justshe]

"Ergo, a ruling was necessary to settle the issue. "

And shut McCain up for awhile.

[Mo1]

It was a stupid law and I think Bush signed it knowing the courts would knock it down. At least by having it go to the courts, we have a ruling on the constitutionality of the law.

That would be my guess .. only question is .. will McCain finally shut up?

[Petronski]

KAREN LECRAFT HENDERSON, Circuit Judge, concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part: I believe the statute before us is unconstitutional in virtually all of its particulars; it breaks faith with the fundamental principle—understood by our nation’s Founding Generation, inscribed in the First Amendment and repeatedly reaffirmed by the United States Supreme Court—that “debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open.” New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 270 (1964). My colleagues’ per curiam opinion and their other opinions ignore the statute’s transparent infirmity and leave standing its most pernicious provisions, apparently on the ground that candidatefocused political speech inevitably “corrupts” the individuals to whom it refers. Their reasoning and conclusions treat a First Amendment with which I am not familiar.

[Wphile]

...will McCain finally shut up?

I doubt it.

[mware]

I gave it a quick read (300+pages) and as far as I can tell, the only dissent was an expression of a desire to throw out the whole damnable thing.

Judge Scalia????

[goldstategop]

The First Amendment says Congress shall make NO laws. In my opinion the entire statute IS on its face unconstitutional. I'm not sure about the other jurists' reasoning and conclusions either. Its plain as mud they aren't reading the same Constitution the rest of us are.

[justshe]

~~~Don't worry; they won't let that stop them.~~~

No kidding!

Obfuscate/fabricate/adulterate/obliterate

[Mo1]

True ... but it will be fun to rub this one in his face ..

[Paulus Invictus]

A radio report today siad it had to do with the amount of money a party could spend on a campaign.

[Dog]

fyi...

[CounterCounterCulture]

HOT DAMN! Good news!

(should never have come to this though...but I'll take it)

[mwl1]

If Henderson wanted to strike down more, she would have issued a concurring opinion in part, and a dissenting opinion in part. Media is obviously either clueless or lying, as usual.

[justshe]

That was MY reading too. The dissent was to throw out the entire bill.

[CounterCounterCulture]

will McCain finally shut up?

McCain? Shut up? In our dreams! LOL!

"C-C-C-C-Campaign Finance Re-re-reform"

[aristeides]

If Henderson wanted to strike down more, she would have issued a concurring opinion in part, and a dissenting opinion in part.

That's precisely what she did issue. KAREN LECRAFT HENDERSON, concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part.

[mwl1]

Henderson now a possibility for the US Supreme Court in my opinion. What, the RATS are going to oppose a woman circuit judge from the distinguished DC circuit?

[mwl1]

Yes, but the media is spinning this as a 2-1 decision, not a unanimous decision. They are scheming liars.

[GraniteStateConservative]

Wellstone's legacy was that election-eve advertising ban. Poof, it goes away.

[GraniteStateConservative]

The $2K limit is great. There should be no limit at all, just full disclosure as Bush has said.