[Dane]

That's all fine & good, but it's inconsequential to the matter at hand. Whether Souter's ruling and/or media reports note the limitations on labor unions, or only those on corporations, is meaningless, because under the law they are regarded as identical

But it is a 32 year old law. CFR(McCain/Feingold) is brand new. The only thing that really bothers me is the 30 day and 60 day ad bans and I still think they will be shot down.

Also I was just pointing out the bias of the reporter with her leaving out the word "union" in regards to the original law.

[AntiGuv]

Yes, media bias is a given in my view. The issue advocacy windows are my primary concern as well, and I'm not quite as confident as some others that these will get struck down. To be exact, I think that the Court will rule that expenditures may be regulated, even if blanket ad prohibitions are deemed unconstitutional (as they should be). How the Court reconciles or accommodates the two, assuming that's the eventual decision, is obviously an open question.

[Lazamataz]

The only thing that really bothers me is the 30 day and 60 day ad bans and I still think they will be shot down.

I hope you are right.

Also I was just pointing out the bias of the reporter with her leaving out the word "union" in regards to the original law.

Good catch.

You are much nicer away from the drug threads. Therefore: Drugs are bad for you, Dane. Just say no.