I have just seen a copy
of the jurisdictional statement of Senators McCain, Feingold, Snowe, and
Jeffords, and Representatives Meehan and Shays filed yesterday in the Supreme
Court. (When it is posted somewhere, I'll add a link.) On the question
of Judge Leon's rewriting of the backup provision on electioneering communications,
I was happy to see the following at page 26: "Finally, while a decision sustaining
the primary definition would obviate the point, the district court correctly
sustained the back-up definition of "electioneering communications," but
erred in severing the final clause of that definition. That clause -- which
requires that the advertisements at issue be "suggestive of no plausible
meaning other than exhortation to vote for or against a candidate for public
office"--does not make the definition impermissibly vague. To the contrary,
it provides an assurance that any conceivable doubt regarding application
of the back-up definition will be resolved against coverage."
--
Rick Hasen
Professor of Law and William M. Rains Fellow
Loyola Law School
919 South Albany Street
Los Angeles, CA 90015-1211
(213)736-1466
(213)380-3769 - fax
rick.hasen@lls.edu
http://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/hasen.html