Tweet
Yes, no more soft money! Yes, no more attack adds by unions and other interest groups in the weeks before the election. Free speech is less important that stopping corruption!
JUSTICE STEVENS and JUSTICE O?CONNOR delivered the Court's
opinion with respect to BCRA Titles I and II, concluding that the
statute?s two principal, complementary features?Congress? effort to
plug the soft-money loophole and its regulation of electioneering
communications?must be upheld in the main.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE delivered the opinion of the Court with respect
to miscellaneous BCRA Title III and IV provisions, concluding that
the District Court?s judgment with respect to these provisions must
be affirmed.
The District Court's decision upholding BCRA §311?s expansion
of FECA §318(a) to include mandatory ectioneeringcommunications-
disbursements disclosure is affirmed because such inclusion bears a sufficient relationship to the important governmental interest of ?shed[ding] the light of publicity? on campaign financing, Buckley, 424 U. S., at 81. Assuming, as the Court must, that FECA §318 is valid both to begin with and as amended by BCRA §311?s amendments other than the electioneering-communications inclusion, the latter inclusion is not itself unconstitutional. P. 9. 3.
BCRA §318?which forbids individuals ?17 years old or younger?
to make contributions to candidates and political parties, 2
U. S. C. A. §441k?violates the First Amendment rights of minors,
see, e.g., Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist.
STEVENS and O?CONNOR, JJ., delivered the opinion of the Court with
respect to BCRA Titles I and II, in which SOUTER, GINSBURG, and
BREYER, JJ., joined. REHNQUIST, C. J., delivered the opinion of the
Court with respect to BCRA Titles III and IV, in which O?CONNOR,
SCALIA, KENNEDY, and SOUTER, JJ., joined, in which STEVENS,
GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined except with respect to BCRA §305, and in which THOMAS, J., joined with respect to BCRA §§304, 305, 307,316, 319, and 403(b). BREYER, J., delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to BCRA Title V, in which STEVENS, O?CONNOR, SOUTER, and GINSBURG, JJ., joined. SCALIA, J., filed an opinion concurring with respect to BCRA Titles III and IV, dissenting with respect to BCRA Titles I and V, and concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part with respect to BCRA Title II. THOMAS, J., filed an opinion concurring with respect to BCRA Titles III and IV, except for BCRA §§311 and 318, concurring in the result with respect to BCRA §318, concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part with respect to BCRA Title II, and dissenting with respect to BCRA Titles I, V, and §311, in which opinion SCALIA, J., joined as to Parts I, II?A, and II?B. KENNEDY, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part with respect to BCRA Titles I and II, in which REHNQUIST, C. J., joined, in which SCALIA, J., joined except to the extent the opinion upholds new FECA §323(e) and BCRA §202, and in which THOMAS, J., joined with respect to BCRA §213. REHNQUIST, C. J., filed an opinion dissenting with respect to BCRA Titles I and V, in which SCALIA and KENNEDY, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., filed an opinion dissenting with respect to BCRA §305, in which GINSBURG and BREYER, JJ., joined.
JUSTICE STEVENS and JUSTICE O?CONNOR delivered the Court's
opinion with respect to BCRA Titles I and II, concluding that the
statute?s two principal, complementary features?Congress? effort to
plug the soft-money loophole and its regulation of electioneering
communications?must be upheld in the main.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE delivered the opinion of the Court with respect
to miscellaneous BCRA Title III and IV provisions, concluding that
the District Court?s judgment with respect to these provisions must
be affirmed.
The District Court's decision upholding BCRA §311?s expansion
of FECA §318(a) to include mandatory ectioneeringcommunications-
disbursements disclosure is affirmed because such inclusion bears a sufficient relationship to the important governmental interest of ?shed[ding] the light of publicity? on campaign financing, Buckley, 424 U. S., at 81. Assuming, as the Court must, that FECA §318 is valid both to begin with and as amended by BCRA §311?s amendments other than the electioneering-communications inclusion, the latter inclusion is not itself unconstitutional. P. 9. 3.
BCRA §318?which forbids individuals ?17 years old or younger?
to make contributions to candidates and political parties, 2
U. S. C. A. §441k?violates the First Amendment rights of minors,
see, e.g., Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist.
STEVENS and O?CONNOR, JJ., delivered the opinion of the Court with
respect to BCRA Titles I and II, in which SOUTER, GINSBURG, and
BREYER, JJ., joined. REHNQUIST, C. J., delivered the opinion of the
Court with respect to BCRA Titles III and IV, in which O?CONNOR,
SCALIA, KENNEDY, and SOUTER, JJ., joined, in which STEVENS,
GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined except with respect to BCRA §305, and in which THOMAS, J., joined with respect to BCRA §§304, 305, 307,316, 319, and 403(b). BREYER, J., delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to BCRA Title V, in which STEVENS, O?CONNOR, SOUTER, and GINSBURG, JJ., joined. SCALIA, J., filed an opinion concurring with respect to BCRA Titles III and IV, dissenting with respect to BCRA Titles I and V, and concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part with respect to BCRA Title II. THOMAS, J., filed an opinion concurring with respect to BCRA Titles III and IV, except for BCRA §§311 and 318, concurring in the result with respect to BCRA §318, concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part with respect to BCRA Title II, and dissenting with respect to BCRA Titles I, V, and §311, in which opinion SCALIA, J., joined as to Parts I, II?A, and II?B. KENNEDY, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part with respect to BCRA Titles I and II, in which REHNQUIST, C. J., joined, in which SCALIA, J., joined except to the extent the opinion upholds new FECA §323(e) and BCRA §202, and in which THOMAS, J., joined with respect to BCRA §213. REHNQUIST, C. J., filed an opinion dissenting with respect to BCRA Titles I and V, in which SCALIA and KENNEDY, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., filed an opinion dissenting with respect to BCRA §305, in which GINSBURG and BREYER, JJ., joined.
I like "dumbocrats"
Comment