M.D. Rawlings
Classical Liberal
By George F. Will
June 28
The Washington Post
The fate of Arizona’s Clean Elections Act, which the Supreme Court on Monday declared unconstitutional, was foreshadowed March 28, during oral arguments. Lawyers defending the law insisted its purpose was to combat corruption or the appearance thereof. The court has repeatedly said this is the only constitutionally permissible reason for restricting the quantity of political speech.
LINK
States limiting speech on the basis of "eliminating corruption" or "leveling the playing field" is a no go. Good news for the First Amendment.
June 28
The Washington Post
The fate of Arizona’s Clean Elections Act, which the Supreme Court on Monday declared unconstitutional, was foreshadowed March 28, during oral arguments. Lawyers defending the law insisted its purpose was to combat corruption or the appearance thereof. The court has repeatedly said this is the only constitutionally permissible reason for restricting the quantity of political speech.
LINK
States limiting speech on the basis of "eliminating corruption" or "leveling the playing field" is a no go. Good news for the First Amendment.
Last edited:
