- Posted February 21, 2012
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
SUPREME COURT NOTEBOOK: Court blocks Mont. campaign money ruling
By Mark Sherman
Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court last Friday blocked a Montana court ruling upholding limits on corporate campaign spending. The state court ruling appears to be at odds with the high court's 2010 decision striking down a federal ban on those campaign expenditures.
The justices put the Montana ruling on hold while they consider an appeal from corporations seeking to be free of spending limits. The state argues, and the Montana Supreme Court agreed, that political corruption gave rise to the century-old ban on corporate campaign spending.
In the 2010 Citizens United case, a sharply divided Supreme Court ruled that independent spending by corporations does "not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption."
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a dissenter in Citizens United, issued a brief statement for herself and Justice Stephen Breyer saying that campaign spending since the decision makes "it exceedingly difficult to maintain that independent expenditures by corporations 'do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption.'"
Ginsburg appeared to be referring to the rise of unregulated super PACs that have injected millions of dollars into the Republican presidential campaign. She said the case "will give the court an opportunity to consider whether, in light of the huge sums currently deployed to buy candidates' allegiance, Citizens United should continue to hold sway."
The court's action last Friday does not mean the justices eventually will hear the case. Their most likely course might be simply reversing the state court ruling.
It probably will be several months before they decide what to do.
American Tradition Partnership, based in Washington, D.C., led the challenge to the state's 1912 Corrupt Practices Act. A lower state court ruled that the state law was unconstitutional in the wake of the Citizens United decision.
But in December, the Montana Supreme Court said the law could remain in place because it was a response to political corruption and allows for some corporate spending.
Montana holds primary elections on June 5, and American Tradition Partnership and two other corporations wanted to be free of the state limits in time to influence those elections.
Montana Attorney General Steve Bullock said corporations are no longer bound by the state law.
But, Bullock said, "I am encouraged that the Supreme Court will give this careful consideration and I look forward to continuing to fight for Montana in defending our century-old law."
The decision to block the Montana's Supreme Court's ruling is a win for everyone's First Amendment rights, said the American Tradition Partnership.
"Stripping people of their right to engage in political speech because you do not like the identity of the speaker is an assault on the republic's founding principles," the partnership added.
Published: Tue, Feb 21, 2012
headlines Oakland County
- Annual Meeting
- Oakland County clerk/register brings services to Highland Township and surrounding areas with June 4 local office visit
- Whitmer announces Wayne, Oakland, Macomb commit to expand Project DIAMOnD, calls for statewide expansion of “infrastructure for innovation”
- Oakland County completes work for first RainSmart resident
- SUPREME COURT NOTEBOOK
headlines National
- This Los Angeles lawyer found her calling as a death doula
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- Artificial intelligence tools for brief writing and analysis are a small firm litigator’s new best friend
- Baker McKenzie partner drops suit seeking IRS documents on partnership scrutiny
- Family members sue networks after learning of loved ones’ deaths by seeing bodies on TV
- Ex-BigLaw attorney once ‘consumed with remorse’ over $10M client theft sentenced in new scheme