Court Finds Free Speech OK, Just Not In Elections By Johnathan R.
The other potential title of this post is: “Why John McCain Is Not Fit to Be President.” The collusion among all 3 branches of government in restricting Americans’ right to air their opinions during election season – the Congress for passing, the President for signing and the Supreme Court for upholding McCain-Feingold – was one of the most egregious displays of limiting our civil liberties in this nation’s history (the Court, plainly, was manifestly wrong). Now another court has ruled in a way that challenges McCain-Feingold, but upholds its overall legitimacy.
A federal court on Thursday loosened restrictions on corporations, unions and other special interest groups that run political advertising in peak election season.
The 2-1 ruling said groups may mention candidates by name in commercials as long as they are trying to influence public policy, rather than sway an election.
The ruling came in a challenge to the so-called McCain Feingold law designed to reduce the influence of big money in political campaigns. The law banned groups from using unrestricted money to run advertisements that name candidates two months before a general election or one month before a primary.
Some lawmakers have predicted such a ruling would create a loophole in the 2002 law. The case automatically heads to the Supreme Court for review.
Got that? Freedom of speech is OK, so long as the speech in question is not intended to sway an election. Excuse me, but what the hell else is the point of free speech if not to sway an election? This legalistic hair-splitting, which affirms the right of the government to silence critics, demonstrates just how dangerous McCain-Feingold is.
This content was used with the permission of GOP Bloggers.