Skip to comments.
Supreme Court Handing Down Ruling in Campaign Finance Reform (main parts upheld)
FOX News
| 10 Dec 2003
| FOX News
Posted on 12/10/2003 7:09:03 AM PST by July 4th
Reports that main portions of McCain-Feingold are now being upheld! People currently wading through a decision of over 300 pages.
TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bcra; blackrobedictators; bush; bushscotuscfr; cfr; elitisttyrants; firstamendment; freedomofspeech; mccainfeingold; nyt; oligarchy; restrictfreespeech; scotus; tyrannyofthefew
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 1,941-1,949 next last
1
posted on
12/10/2003 7:09:04 AM PST
by
July 4th
To: July 4th
Soft money band to parties upheld, as well as the corporate/labor bans on money.
No idea what the ruling will be on the 60-day "ban on speech" before elections.
2
posted on
12/10/2003 7:10:10 AM PST
by
July 4th
(George W. Bush, Avenger of the Bones)
To: July 4th
Oh, this is just great. The majority opinion was written by Stevens and O'Connor.
3
posted on
12/10/2003 7:10:17 AM PST
by
Tree of Liberty
(I can get you a toe by 3 o'clock this afternoon... WITH nail polish)
To: July 4th
FNC is saying the money part is being upheld .. they are still reading through the 300 page opinion
4
posted on
12/10/2003 7:10:49 AM PST
by
Mo1
(House Work, If you do it right , will kill you!)
To: Congressman Billybob
PING!
5
posted on
12/10/2003 7:11:05 AM PST
by
Constitution Day
(Please do not emanate into the penumbra.)
To: July 4th
"We're here waiting for the 10 busloads of Free Republic Constitutional scholars to arrive."
To: Mo1
Tell them to skim the first 200 or so pages and jump right to the end.
7
posted on
12/10/2003 7:11:33 AM PST
by
Catspaw
To: July 4th; sauropod
The suspense is killing me. How many ways will we be screwed this time?
Somebody get back to me with a number, I can't bear to read...
To: Tree of Liberty
Oh, this is just great. The majority opinion was written by Stevens and O'Connor. Said O'Connor, "Based on International law, we find that all speech that criticizes any sitting politician shall be outlawed...so it is written..."
9
posted on
12/10/2003 7:12:00 AM PST
by
smith288
(Did you even look at yourself in the mirror when you left the house??? Ugh)
To: July 4th
No idea what the ruling will be on the 60-day "ban on speech" before elections. The Constitution would be meaningless if they upheld that ban.
To: Always Right
Tell that to the President who signed it. He certainly didn't seem to mind.
11
posted on
12/10/2003 7:12:53 AM PST
by
KantianBurke
(Don't Tread on Me)
To: July 4th
Where are all the FReepers who assured us it would be struck down??
hhhhhmmmmmmmmm???
12
posted on
12/10/2003 7:13:12 AM PST
by
GeronL
(My tagline for rent..... $5 per month or 550 posts/replies, whichever comes first... its a bargain!!)
To: Always Right
I believe Bush signed this after saying the Supremes would strike it down.
13
posted on
12/10/2003 7:13:15 AM PST
by
AppyPappy
(If You're Not A Part Of The Solution, There's Good Money To Be Made In Prolonging The Problem.)
To: Always Right
The Constitution would be meaningless if they upheld that banSCOTUS gave up on the Constitution long ago.
14
posted on
12/10/2003 7:14:04 AM PST
by
GeronL
(My tagline for rent..... $5 per month or 550 posts/replies, whichever comes first... its a bargain!!)
To: KantianBurke
He's a Constitution minded President.
You're the anti-Constitutionalist. Go to Liberia with your anarchy.
To: July 4th
I just heard the report also. I may be wrong, but it sounded like most or all of the justices who supported the law were liberals (and yes, I do include O'connor in that group). This would lead me to believe that this does not bode well for conservatives.
To: July 4th; Congressman Billybob
I'll bet John Kerry had an insider's tip on this yesterday when he objected to the NRA getting a cable channel so it can be a news/media organization. He said that would enable them to "skirt" the finance reforms on the 60 day ban on free speech.
If nothing else, it shows us how to skirt the ban.
Declare yourself a newsletter/newspaper immediately.
17
posted on
12/10/2003 7:14:57 AM PST
by
xzins
(Proud to be Army!)
To: Catspaw
FNC needs to get speed readers to find out the rest of the ruling
18
posted on
12/10/2003 7:14:57 AM PST
by
Mo1
(House Work, If you do it right , will kill you!)
To: Tree of Liberty
----Oh, this is just great. The majority opinion was written by Stevens and O'Connor.----
(Psst. Mr. President. Your "sign-the-damn-thing-and-let-SCOTUS-fix-it" plan isn't working out. What's Plan B?)
-Dan
19
posted on
12/10/2003 7:15:58 AM PST
by
Flux Capacitor
('Cause WE.... GOT.... THE BOMBS. Ooooooo-KAY?!)
To: AppyPappy
I believe Bush signed this after saying the Supremes would strike it down
No. Bush never said that. He warned Congress that if they let it passed he would veto it.
Timid Congresscritters were scared of the media and liberals if they voted it down.
It was all those 'moderate' Republicans who said it would be best politically if it passed and was struck down in court. They said it would be.
Where are THEY?? Where are the FReepers who said not to worry because it would be struck down?
hiding?
20
posted on
12/10/2003 7:16:26 AM PST
by
GeronL
(My tagline for rent..... $5 per month or 550 posts/replies, whichever comes first... its a bargain!!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 1,941-1,949 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson