Bopp can point to an immediate
effect of the "bright line" 30/60 day electioneering communications test
One of the reasons the NRA in the lower court hearing the BCRA case asked
for a stay of the backup provision was the argument that the primary bright
line definition would not come into play for a number of months---not until
30 days before the first primary. According to one of the applications filed
by James Bopp (see the three posts immediately below), this is not quite right.
The brief states the following:
While resurrecting the
unconstitutional 30/60-day blackout definition seems to buy some time for
some issue advocacy groups, it has a bite now since there is a federal runoff
election tentatively set for June 7, 2003, in Texas, which means that the
60-day gag period is already in effect there. See The Green Papers: Texas
2003 Off Year Election, (visited May 8, 2003). And with rolling caucuses
and primaries beginning in January 2004, the 30-day gag period will kick in
during
December 2003, weeks and likely months before this Court issues its decision
in this case. The primary “electioneering communication” definition thus
does not solve the First Amendment violations posed by the truncated backup
definition, it merely reframes them. It will affect the American people, causing
them irreparable harm – and it is unconstitutional,
if district court decisions have any meaning.
Thus, Bopp has a good argument that the Supreme Court should consider this
issue now. I do not recall whether Bopp brought this fact to the lower court's
attention during the stay proceedings there.
"Groups Seek to Overturn BCRA Stay" Roll Call offers this
breaking news report (registration required).
--
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
http://electionlaw.blogspot.com