Even more Beaumont news and commentary
The Boston Globe offers "Supreme
Court Backs Campaign-Gift Limits.". The Washington Times offers
"Campaign
Fund-Raising Caps Imposed on Non-Profits." Todd Gaziano writes this
op-ed in USA Today. The Charlotte Observer offers "Supreme Court
affirms ban on donations by nonprofits." The Denver Post offers
this
editorial. The Los Angeles Daily News offers "High
court upholds ban on contributions." (The Los Angeles Times story
does not yet appear to be posted on the newspaper's website.)
I take strong issue with Bob Bauer's post that Beaumont is not news.
(By the way, both Ed Still and I on our blogs incorrectly predicted before
oral argument that this case could have come out the other way. So much
for Bob's "no one---not one person" language.)
He may be right about the problem with using the "rebuke" language in some
press release, and he may be right that I'm overreading the "historical prologue,"
but my view is that this case is big news. I've already given my
detailed analysis, but let me just give a few headlines here, and Bob can
refute them one-by-one if he likes:
1. The Court reaffirms and bolsters Austin's rationales for limits
on corporate campaign finance activity. Austin is a case that has
been considered somewhat shaky as precedent. Austin is a key case
toward upholding the constitutionality of BCRA's separate segregated funds
requirement for corporations and unions extended to "electioneering communications."
2. The Court reaffirms and strengthens the anti-circumvention rationale,
mentioned in Colorado Republican II and extended to justify limits
on corporate election activity.
3. The Court changes its views as to the merits of limiting the First Amendment
rights of corporations, at least in the context of elections. (Note Jan
Baran's unconvincing counterspin in the Washington Times piece linked
above, where Baran suggests that Nike v. Kasky would be more on point.)
4. The majority managed to keep Justice O'Connor's votes on all these propositions,
where, given her dissent in Austin, one might have thought to be quite difficult.
Not news?
--
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