Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« 2A Symposium in Chicago | Main | The View from Ground Zero »

Major First Amendment case coming up

Posted by David Hardy · 4 September 2009 05:25 PM

On Sept. 9 the Supreme Court hears Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. That it may be a major decision is suggested by the fact that after first briefing and argument, the Supreme Court ordered a second briefing and argument, and by the argument being held before the Court formally begins its new Term in October.

It's a challenge to electoral campaign regulations, which forbid corporations to spend money to influence elections (tho they can create and contribute to separate political action committees, which are subject to a variety of regulatory burdens). [I'm not clear whether it involved the separate ban, in McCain-Feingold, against merely mentioning a candidate's name in purchased airtime within 30/60 days of an election). It's brought by the producers of "Hillary: The Movie," a 90 minute very anti-Hillary documentary. They wanted to buy airtime to run it back when its subject was still a candidate.

It was initially briefed and argued on fairly narrow grounds. The gov't's attorney, charged with arguing for the state, wound up admitting that, under the gov't's view, it could ban a book on politics if made by a corporation, which drew a negative reaction with Justice Alito. Story here. Then the Supreme Court ordered new briefing and argument, to focus upon whether the earlier decision of Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, which upheld a law forbidding corporations to make campaign expenditures, should be overruled. Story here.

ScotusWiki has detailed entry with links to briefs.

· General con law

5 Comments | Leave a comment

RAH | September 6, 2009 10:22 AM | Reply

Good, it seems the justices are becoming aware how freedom is circumscribed under McCain Feingold. That was a bad decision to approve the bill by Bush and that SCOTUS allowed it was constitutional.

Jim | September 6, 2009 12:56 PM | Reply

I was intensely disappointed in GW for signing that bill, and in McCain for sponsoring it.

fwb | September 8, 2009 9:04 AM | Reply

The First Amendment and ALL the Bill of Rights pertains ONLY to humans as individuals. An individual may have his or her rights violated but a corporation cannot. Corporation may have privileges and immunities but they can never have rights. Regardless of the stupidity of court decisions stating corporations are persons, the truth cannot be altered. Rights are endowed by the Creator on his creation. Rights do not come from government because government is subordinate to people and cannot grant its superior anything.

May God deal with those who judge in the same manner as they judge.

Tiocfaidh ar la!

Bill | September 8, 2009 12:33 PM | Reply

But what is a corporation, other than an organization of PEOPLE, that those people have created as a means through with to act?

Bill | September 8, 2009 12:33 PM | Reply

"with" should be "which"

Leave a comment