Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc.

Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc.

SCOTUSCase
Litigants=Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc.
ArgueDate=April 25
ArgueYear=2007
DecideDate=June 25
DecideYear=2007
FullName=Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc.
Docket=06-969
CitationNew=551 U.S. ___
Prior= Injunction denied, No. 04-1260, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29036 (D.D.C. Aug. 17, 2004); injunction denied, appeal dismissed, No. 04-1260, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 18795, (D.D.C. Sept. 1, 2004); injunction denied, 542 U.S. 1305 (2004) (Rehnquist, C.J.); dismissed, No. 04-1260, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17226 (D.D.C. May 9, 2005); probable jurisdiction noted, 126 S. Ct. 36 (2005); vacated and remanded, 546 U.S. 410 (2006); summary judgment granted, 466 F. Supp. 2d, at 202; cert. granted
Subsequent=
Holding=The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act's restriction on issue ads in the months preceding elections is unconstitutional.
SCOTUS=2006
Majority=Roberts (Parts I and II)
JoinMajority=Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito
Concurrence=Scalia
JoinConcurrence=Kennedy, Thomas
Concurrence2=
JoinConcurrence2=
Concurrence/Dissent=
JoinConcurrence/Dissent=
Dissent=Souter
JoinDissent=Stevens, Ginsburg, Breyer
Dissent2=
JoinDissent2=
LawsApplied=U.S. Const. amend. I

"Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc.", 551 U.S. ___ (2007) , [ [http://laws.findlaw.com/us/000/06-969.html Full text of the Supreme Court opinion] from FindLaw] was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that issue ads may not be banned from the months preceding a primary or general election.

Background

In 2002, the Congress passed the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act ("McCain-Feingold") to regulate money in public election campaigns. One provision of the legislation limited "issue ads," those ads using a candidate's name with regards to a particular issue, such as abortion. Section 203 prohibited issue ads within 30 days of a primary election and 60 days of a general election. In "McConnell v. Federal Election Commission", the Supreme Court upheld section 203 and other sections against a facial challenge that the law was unconstitutional. This left a significant open question about whether the FEC could constitutionally apply (enforce) the law.

Ruling

The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, crafted a major exception to the limitations on broadcast ads within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election. The court ruled that unless an ad could not reasonably be interpreted as anything other than an ad urging the support or defeat of a candidate, it was eligible for an "as applied" exception to the McCain-Feingold limits on issue ads close to an election.

The decision of the court by Chief Justice John G. Roberts is most notable for its strong language (it concludes "Enough is enough") and for demonstrating a skepticism of campaign finance regulation that was absent in "McConnell". Roberts' opinion, however, was joined only by Justice Samuel Alito. The rest of the majority consisted of Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, and Clarence Thomas, who would have gone further and simply reversed "McConnell" altogether.

Justices John Paul Stevens, Stephen Breyer, David Souter, and Ruth Bader Ginsberg dissented.

ee also

* List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 551

References


Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

Игры ⚽ Нужен реферат?

Look at other dictionaries:

  • Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission — Supreme Court of the United States Argued March 24, 2009 …   Wikipedia

  • McConnell v. Federal Election Commission — Supreme Court of the United States Argued September 8, 2003 …   Wikipedia

  • First Amendment to the United States Constitution — First Amendment redirects here. For other uses, see First Amendment (disambiguation). United States of America This a …   Wikipedia

  • 2005 term per curiam opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States — The Supreme Court of the United States handed down sixteen per curiam opinions during its 2005 term, which lasted from October 3, 2005 until October 1, 2006.[1] Because per curiam decisions are issued from the Court as an institution, these… …   Wikipedia

  • Corporate personhood — refers to the question about which subset of rights that are afforded under the law to natural persons should also be afforded to corporations as legal persons. In Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819), corporations were recognized as having the… …   Wikipedia

  • Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act — Titre An act to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide bipartisan campaign reform Abréviation BCRA Pays  États Unis …   Wikipédia en Français

  • Campaign finance in the United States — is the financing of electoral campaigns at the federal, state, and local levels.At the federal level, the primary source of campaign funds is individuals; political action committees are a distant second. Contributions from both are limited.… …   Wikipedia

  • Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act — of 2002 Full title An act to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide bipartisan campaign reform. Acronym BCRA Colloquial name(s) McCain–Feingold, Shays–Meehan Enacted by the …   Wikipedia

  • Portal:Supreme Court of the United States — Shortcut: P:SCOTUS Wikipedia portals: Culture Geography Health History Mathematics Natural sciences People Philosophy Religion …   Wikipedia

  • 1er amendement de la Constitution américaine — Premier amendement de la Constitution des États Unis Cet article traite du Premier amendement de la Constitution américaine. Pour les autres significations, voir Premier amendement (homonymie) États Unis Cet article fait partie de la série  …   Wikipédia en Français

Share the article and excerpts

Direct link
Do a right-click on the link above
and select “Copy Link”