That’s the People’s Rights Amendment, introduced by Congressman Jim McGovern: Section 1. We the people who ordain and establish this Constitution intend the rights protected by this Constitution to be the rights of natural persons. Section 2. People, person, or persons as used in this Constitution does not include corporations, limited liability companies or other […]
Archive | Restrictions on Campaign Contrbs. and Expenses
Russian Authorities Ban Toy Protest Because Toys “Are Not Even People”
By Ilya Somin on February 18, 2012 1:10 am in Freedom of Speech, Restrictions on Campaign Contrbs. and Expenses, Russia
Officials in the Siberian city of Barnaul recently banned an anti-government protest using toys on the specious justification that “toys, especially imported toys, are not only not citizens of Russia but they are not even people” [HT: Julie Ershadi]: There hadn’t been many – indeed any – rallies like it before in Russia. Last month […]
The Google Anti-Stop-Online-Piracy-Act Statement, Corporate Speech, and the First Amendment
Following Citizens United, I heard many people argue that the Court was wrong because corporations should not be seen as having First Amendment rights — not just that they do have First Amendment rights but that there’s some special compelling interest that justifies restricting corporate speech about candidates, but that corporations aren’t people and therefore […]
The Original and Traditional Meaning of “Freedom … of the Press”
By Eugene Volokh on January 2, 2012 3:29 pm in Defamation, Freedom of Speech, Freedom to Gather Information, Restrictions on Campaign Contrbs. and Expenses
My article, Freedom for the Press as an Industry, or for the Press as a Technology? From the Framing to Today, 160 U. Penn. L. Rev. 459 (2011), available in its full PDF form here, has just been published; here is the Introduction: “[T]he freedom … of the press” specially protects the press as an […]
Montana Supreme Court vs. the United States Supreme Court
By Eugene Volokh on December 30, 2011 8:17 pm in Freedom of Speech, Restrictions on Campaign Contrbs. and Expenses
In today’s Western Tradition Partnership, Inc. v. Attorney General, the Montana Supreme Court upheld a ban on corporate expenditures to speak in support of or opposition to political candidates — pretty much the same sort of ban that the United States Supreme Court struck down in Citizens United v. FEC. The majority argues that Citizens […]
Proposed Constitutional Amendment Would Strip Pro-Business (But Not Anti-Business) Non-Profits of First Amendment Rights
I blogged about the Sen. Sanders / Reps. Deutch, DeFazio, Hastings, McDermott proposed constitutional amendment last week, but an e-mail from a reader led me to one other problem with the amendment. The amendment, you may recall, reads: Section 1. The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural […]
Proposed Constitutional Amendment Would Ban Editorials About Candidates or Ballot Measures by Nearly All Newspapers
By Eugene Volokh on December 9, 2011 3:16 am in Freedom of Speech, Restrictions on Campaign Contrbs. and Expenses
That’s one of the effects of HJR 90, proposed by Reps. Theodore Deutch, Peter DeFazio, Alcee Hastings, and Jim McDermott, and a similar Senate proposal by Sen. Bernie Sanders: Section 1. The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons and do not extend to for-profit corporations, limited […]
Newspapers Have No First Amendment Exemption from Political Spending Reporting Requirements
By Eugene Volokh on September 8, 2011 5:46 pm in Freedom of Speech, Restrictions on Campaign Contrbs. and Expenses
Regulations of campaign expenditures usually exempt the media (which has usually been read quite broadly to include most regularly published publications). Thus, for instance, the Federal Election Campaign Act, which as written banned independent expenditures of over $1000 in support of or opposition to a candidate, exempted the media — otherwise, the Act would have […]
“How Campaign Finance Laws Made the British Press So Powerful”
That’s the title of an article in The New Republic. England apparently sharply constrains campaign spending (both by candidates and by advocacy groups that are acting independently of the candidates), so unsurprisingly this means dramatically greater power for newspapers. And equally unsurprisingly this is leading the author to call for still more restrictions, this time […]
District Judge Reaffirms Decision Striking Down Ban on Corporate Contributions to Candidate Campaigns
I blogged about the original decision here, and about an earlier appellate court decision to the contrary here. After the original decision striking down the ban, the district asked for more briefing in light of a Supreme Court precedent that the parties and he hadn’t cited, but yesterday he reaffirmed his earlier decision; Prof. Rick […]
Source of Federal Authority for Restricting Contributions to Federal Candidates
A commenter asks what I see as the source of federal authority for restricting contributions to federal candidates. The Court’s answer as to Senators and Representatives has generally been Article I, § 4, which says that “the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter [Regulations of the Times, Places and Manner of […]
Unconstitutional to Ban Corporate Contributions to Candidates (Even When Independent Expenditures Are Allowed)
So a district court held yesterday in United States v. Danielczyk (E.D. Va.). This is the opposite result from one reached by the Eighth Circuit ten days ago. (The district court discusses the district court decision that the Eighth Circuit affirmed, but not the Eighth Circuit decision itself.) As I said when I posted about […]