The Constitutionality of Regulating Political Advertisements PDF Download
Are you looking for read ebook online? Search for your book and save it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Download The Constitutionality of Regulating Political Advertisements PDF full book. Access full book title The Constitutionality of Regulating Political Advertisements by . Download full books in PDF and EPUB format.
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Advertising, Political
Languages : en
Pages : 6
Get Book Here
Book Description
On June 25, 2007, in a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court in Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. v. FEC (WRTL II) affirmed a lower court ruling, finding that a provision of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), prohibiting corporate or labor union treasury funds from being spent on advertisements broadcast within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election, was unconstitutional as applied to ads that Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. sought to run. While not expressly overruling its 2003 ruling in McConnell v. FEC, which upheld the BCRA provision against a First Amendment facial challenge, the Court limited the law's application. Specifically, it ruled that advertisements that may reasonably be interpreted as something other than as an appeal to vote for or against a specific candidate are not the functional equivalent of express advocacy and, therefore, cannot be regulated.
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Advertising, Political
Languages : en
Pages : 6
Get Book Here
Book Description
On June 25, 2007, in a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court in Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. v. FEC (WRTL II) affirmed a lower court ruling, finding that a provision of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), prohibiting corporate or labor union treasury funds from being spent on advertisements broadcast within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election, was unconstitutional as applied to ads that Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. sought to run. While not expressly overruling its 2003 ruling in McConnell v. FEC, which upheld the BCRA provision against a First Amendment facial challenge, the Court limited the law's application. Specifically, it ruled that advertisements that may reasonably be interpreted as something other than as an appeal to vote for or against a specific candidate are not the functional equivalent of express advocacy and, therefore, cannot be regulated.
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Advertising, Political
Languages : en
Pages : 6
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author: Clarke L. Caywood
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Advertising, Political
Languages : en
Pages : 630
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author: Stephen Bates
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Advertising, Political
Languages : en
Pages : 33
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author: Lisa Hill
Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
ISBN: 9789811921223
Category : Political Science
Languages : en
Pages : 168
Get Book Here
Book Description
This open access book represents the first comprehensive, Australia-focused treatment of the problem of false election information disseminated for the purpose of gaining an electoral advantage. It explores cautious legal regulation as the most effective and decisive approach to the issue. In doing so, the book demonstrates that, although experiments with such remedies have met with mixed success elsewhere, they are nevertheless viable, especially in Australia where they have strong public support and are able to withstand constitutional challenge.
Author: Marie Beudels
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Advertising, Political
Languages : en
Pages : 0
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author: Valerie C. Brannon
Publisher: Independently Published
ISBN: 9781092635158
Category : Law
Languages : en
Pages : 50
Get Book Here
Book Description
As the Supreme Court has recognized, social media sites like Facebook and Twitter have become important venues for users to exercise free speech rights protected under the First Amendment. Commentators and legislators, however, have questioned whether these social media platforms are living up to their reputation as digital public forums. Some have expressed concern that these sites are not doing enough to counter violent or false speech. At the same time, many argue that the platforms are unfairly banning and restricting access to potentially valuable speech. Currently, federal law does not offer much recourse for social media users who seek to challenge a social media provider's decision about whether and how to present a user's content. Lawsuits predicated on these sites' decisions to host or remove content have been largely unsuccessful, facing at least two significant barriers under existing federal law. First, while individuals have sometimes alleged that these companies violated their free speech rights by discriminating against users' content, courts have held that the First Amendment, which provides protection against state action, is not implicated by the actions of these private companies. Second, courts have concluded that many non-constitutional claims are barred by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. ยง 230, which provides immunity to providers of interactive computer services, including social media providers, both for certain decisions to host content created by others and for actions taken "voluntarily" and "in good faith" to restrict access to "objectionable" material. Some have argued that Congress should step in to regulate social media sites. Government action regulating internet content would constitute state action that may implicate the First Amendment. In particular, social media providers may argue that government regulations impermissibly infringe on the providers' own constitutional free speech rights. Legal commentators have argued that when social media platforms decide whether and how to post users' content, these publication decisions are themselves protected under the First Amendment. There are few court decisions evaluating whether a social media site, by virtue of publishing, organizing, or even editing protected speech, is itself exercising free speech rights. Consequently, commentators have largely analyzed the question of whether the First Amendment protects a social media site's publication decisions by analogy to other types of First Amendment cases. There are at least three possible frameworks for analyzing governmental restrictions on social media sites' ability to moderate user content. Which of these three frameworks applies will depend largely on the particular action being regulated. Under existing law, social media platforms may be more likely to receive First Amendment protection when they exercise more editorial discretion in presenting user-generated content, rather than if they neutrally transmit all such content. In addition, certain types of speech receive less protection under the First Amendment. Courts may be more likely to uphold regulations targeting certain disfavored categories of speech such as obscenity or speech inciting violence. Finally, if a law targets a social media site's conduct rather than speech, it may not trigger the protections of the First Amendment at all.
Author: United States
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Campaign funds
Languages : en
Pages : 160
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author: Louise I. Gerdes
Publisher: Greenhaven Publishing LLC
ISBN: 0737768649
Category : Young Adult Nonfiction
Languages : en
Pages : 113
Get Book Here
Book Description
The passage of Citizens United by the Supreme Court in 2010 sparked a renewed debate about campaign spending by large political action committees, or Super PACs. Its ruling said that it is okay for corporations and labor unions to spend as much as they want in advertising and other methods to convince people to vote for or against a candidate. This book provides a wide range of opinions on the issue. Includes primary and secondary sources from a variety of perspectives; eyewitnesses, scientific journals, government officials, and many others.
Author: European Commission for Democracy through Law
Publisher: Council of Europe
ISBN: 9789287151919
Category : Political Science
Languages : en
Pages : 56
Get Book Here
Book Description
This publication contains a set of guidelines for good practice in the conduct of elections, based on Europe's electoral heritage, as well as an explanatory report which explains the key principles on which they are based. The guidelines and report were adopted in 2002 by the Council for Democratic Elections and by the European Commission for Democracy through Law (also known as the Venice Commission); and approved in 2003 by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council Europe and by the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities in Europe.
