Friday, April 25, 2014

The U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments on Case involving Campaign 'Lies'

Taking up a closely watched case on the roles of truth and lies in modern politics, Supreme Court justices Tuesday appeared skeptical about the constitutionality of an Ohio law that criminalizes false statements about candidates in the days before elections. 
Emphasizing the need for a ruling with midterm elections approaching, the high court heard oral arguments on the law, which bars reckless statements — lying — about candidates for political office. The decision could void similar statutes in more than a dozen other states.
At issue were billboards prepared in 2010 by the Susan B. Anthony List, a pro-life group, accusing Steven Driehaus of supporting taxpayer-funded abortions because the Democrat voted in Congress for the Affordable Care Act. 
Mr. Driehaus, who lost his re-election bid, filed a complaint with the Ohio Elections Commission. The commission found “probable cause” that the pro-life group violated a state law against making false statements in the 60-day window before the election.
The Susan B. Anthony List, backed by civil liberties groups on the right and the left, said the message on its billboards was protected by the First Amendment and that the Ohio government had no business policing the content of political speech in the middle of an election campaign. 
Lower courts ruled that the Susan B. Anthony List did not face imminent threat of legal action because Mr. Driehaus dropped the case after the vote, but the pro-life group wanted to make similar statements about other pro-choice candidates and continued its challenge.
Read the rest of the story HERE and view a related video below:



If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook either here or here. Please follow us on Twitter here.


No comments: