LegalNewsLine Logo  
Wednesday, May 23 2012 Twitter  feedburner  yahoo  Subscribe in NewsGator Online
News | Contact LegalNewsline | About Us | Advertise | RSS
Enter search keyword
 
clear
clear
NEWSLETTER
Receive our FREE weekly newsletter
click here
Today's Offers:

LNL MOST POPULAR ARTICLES
+ Ind. AG files lawsuits against home loan modification companies
+ Mich. SC justice under scrutiny for real estate transactions
+ Seventh Circuit slams door on shareholder lawsuit against Zimmer
+ Verizon employee settles with employer, union
+ SEC charges N.J. man with real estate investment scam
LNL HOT TOPICS
+ Asbestos
+ Big Pharma
+ BP Oil Spill
+ Class Action
+ Dickie Scruggs
+ Federal Government
+ Financial Crisis
+ Global Warming
+ Hurricane Katrina
+ Labor Issues
+ Lead Paint
+ Sub-Prime Mortgages
U.S. Supreme Court 
story date  
U.S. SC blocks Mont. SC's decision on campaign spending
ruthbaderginsburg.jpg
Ginsburg
clear
stevebullock.jpg
Bullock
WASHINGTON (Legal Newsline) - The U.S. Supreme Court last week stayed a decision by the Montana Supreme Court upholding a state election law.

In December, the state's high court had ruled that a U.S. Supreme Court decision on corporate campaign spending is not in conflict with the state's own law.

On Friday, the nation's high court decided to stay the Montana court's ruling "pending the timely filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari."

The Court said should the petition for a writ of certiorari be denied, the stay will terminate automatically.

If the petition for a writ is granted, the stay will terminate upon the issuance of a mandate by the Court, it explained.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, along with Justice Stephen Breyer, said in their one-page order that they would be happy to take another look at their 2010 Citizens United decision.

"Montana's experience, and experience elsewhere since this Court's decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission make it exceedingly difficult to maintain that independent expenditures by corporations 'do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption,'" they wrote.

"A petition for certiorari will give the Court an opportunity to consider whether, in light of the huge sums currently deployed to buy candidates' allegiance, Citizens United should continue to hold sway."

In Montana, a group of business organizations, led by American Tradition Partnership, filed a lawsuit challenging the state's Corrupt Practices Act, which prohibits corporate contributions in state political campaigns.

In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court held that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited because of the First Amendment.

Citing the decision, a Montana state court declared the CPA unconstitutional, but the state's Supreme Court overturned that decision Dec. 30, 2011.

The U.S. Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling in favor of Citizens United stemmed from a dispute over whether the non-profit corporation could air a film critical of current U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

The decision infuriated President Barack Obama, who criticized the majority in a State of the Union Address.

Obama said the ruling would "open the floodgates for special interests to spend without limit" in elections.

The ruling overturned a ban on spending in support of or in opposition to a candidate -- i.e. advertising -- but kept in tact a law that forbids companies from donating funds directly from their treasuries to candidates.

In light of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, most states with laws on corporate spending bans stopped enforcing their own restrictions.

That is, all but one -- Montana.

Montana Attorney General Steve Bullock expressed mixed feelings on the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to grant a stay in the case.

"While I'm disappointed that for the first time in 100 years Montanans won't be able to rely on our corporate spending ban to safeguard the integrity of our elections, I am encouraged that the Supreme Court will give this careful consideration and I look forward to continuing to fight for Montana in defending our century-old law," he said in a statement.

"For more than a century, anyone has been able to participate in Montana elections -- even out-of-state corporate executives. All we required is that they used their own money, not that of their stockholders, and they disclosed who they are."

In a previous interview on veteran talk radio host Ed Schultz's "The Ed Show" on MSNBC, Bullock admitted there is a chance that the U.S. Supreme Court could strike down the case.

"At the end of the day, the Citizens United decision dealt with a completely different electoral system -- the federal elections and federal laws," he told viewers. "But the vast majority of elections are at the state and local level.

"There are real differences there. That's what we pushed, and I think that the Court would recognize that."

American Tradition now has until the end of next month to ask for the Court to review the case.

If it does not, the Montana Supreme Court decision will stand.

From Legal Newsline: Reach Jessica Karmasek by email at jessica@legalnewsline.com.

Filed Under: U.S. Supreme Court

E-mail this article to a friend | Printer friendly format

MORE NEWS HEADLINES:
+ Group of states file brief to U.S. SC to uphold Mont. election la... - 5/21   read more
+ Mont. AG's brief to U.S. SC over election law due - 5/18   read more
+ U.S. SC denies challenge to New York City's rent control law - 4/24   read more
+ U.S. SC: Outside lawyers entitled to immunity for government work - 4/17   read more
+ U.S. SC won't hear Skilling case again - 4/17   read more
+ U.S. SC to decide if drug reps can receive overtime pay - 4/11   read more
+ Corporations fighting Mont. election law file petition with U.S. ... - 3/30   read more
+ U.S. SC asks if ObamaCare can work without mandate - 3/28   read more
+ W.Va. officials say redistricting ruling worth U.S. SC review - 3/28   read more
+ Justice Kennedy's statements analyzed after health care arguments - 3/27   read more


IN THE SPOTLIGHT:
livermore.jpg
Monday, May 21, 2012
NEW YORK (Legal Newsline) - A think tank affiliated with New York University School of Law has issued a report that "takes aim at the confusing debate over jobs and environmental regulation."
Read more...


+ Controversial presentation on creating 'legacy lawsuits' uncovered - 5/11
+ Defendants mount arguments for keeping Colossus in federal court - 5/8
+ Alaska AG says EPA's actions 'unlawful' - 4/30
+ U.S. SC won't take on torture case against Chevron - 4/27
+ Judge in Ark. Colossus class action did not 'play' - 4/25
BROWSE BY STATE:
 
BROWSE BY AG:
 
BROWSE BY DATE:
 
NEWS WIDGET:
Attention bloggers:
Add Record Headlines to your site!


fast + free- click here
NEWS | CONTACT LEGALNEWSLINE | ABOUT US | ADVERTISE | RSS © 2008 LegalNewsLine.com. All Rights Reserved.