[EL] Thomas on CU & the States

[JBoppjr at aol.com]

Doesn't this case clearly establish that Klepper is wrong.
 
American  Tradition Partnership v. Bullock,  567 U.S. ___ (2012), involved 
a Montana law that prohibited corporations from  paying for independent 
expenditures advocating the election or defeat of state  candidates. The Montana 
Supreme Court upheld this prohibition even though the  U.S. Supreme Court 
had already struck down a similar federal law in Citizens  United v. FEC,  
arguing that Citizens  United did not apply to state laws and that  Montana’s 
history was different. The Court summarily struck down the Montana law  
finding that Montana’s arguments were already disposed of in Citizen  United.
 
Jim Bopp
 
 
In a message dated 7/10/2014 8:03:25 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
BSmith at law.capital.edu writes:

 
_“Could  Clarence Thomas Be Questioning Whether Citizens United Binds the  
States?”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=63138) 
Posted on _July 9,  2014 1:14 pm_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=63138)  by 
_Rick  Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3) 
 
_Steve Klepper blogs_ 
(http://mdappellate.wordpress.com/2014/07/09/could-clarence-thomas-be-questioning-whether-citizens-united-binds-the-states/) . 
I’m skeptical. 

- "Don't give up, Dad! The Rangers can still catch Oakland!"


Bradley A. Smith 
Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault 
Professor of Law 
Capital University Law School 
303 E. Broad St. 
Columbus, OH 43215 
614.236.6317 
http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx




_______________________________________________
Law-election  mailing  list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140711/80697f7f/attachment.html>