Excerpt
(Excerpted from Supreme Court Debates, September 2007)
In McConnell v. Federal Election Commission (FEC) (2003), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), which, among other provisions, regulated so-called “soft money” contributions to political parties and the funding and timing of television issue ads. While the decision was praised by supporters of campaign finance reform, it has been far from the last word on the law’s constitutionality. This year, the provision of the BCRA governing issue ads was once again before the Supreme C…
In This Issue
-
Foreword
Read More -
Wisconsin Right to Life Inc. v. FEC
Impact of the Supreme Court Decision
Read More -
Before the Court
The Justices Weigh in During Oral Arguments
Read More -
Opinion of the Court
The BCRA’s Limit on "Electioneering Communications" Is Unconstitutional
Read More
Pro & Con
Is the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act’s Limit on "Electioneering Communications" by Corporations and Labor Unions Constitutional?
Pro
-
Senator John McCain (AZ-R) and Representatives Tammy Baldwin (WI-D), Christopher Shays (CT-R), and Martin Meehan (MA-D)
-
Norman Dorsen, Aryeh Neier, Burt Neuborne, and John Shattuck
-
The League of Women Voters of the United States, Common Cause, Inc., The Greenlining Institute, and United States Public Interest Research Group (U.S. PIRG)
-
Committee for Economic Development, Norman Ornstein, Thomas Mann, and Anthony Corrado
-
Richard Briffault and Richard L. Hasen
