A Small Step In the Right Direction

From the Associated Press:

The Supreme Court said Monday that a lower court should take a new look at a challenge to federal restrictions on political advertisements, delaying a major ruling on the constitutionality of ad limits until after this year's elections.

Justices could have used the case, brought by an anti-abortion group, to spell out when so-called grass-roots ads are allowed at election time.

Without dealing with that issue, the court overturned a decision that barred Wisconsin Right to Life from broadcasting ads that mentioned a senator during his 2004 re-election campaign.

This is a small step in the right direction regarding political speech. Wisconsin Right to Life responds:

U.S. Supreme Court Unanimously Decides a Key Point in WRTL v. FEC and Remands Case Back to the District Court
Court Removes Major Obstacle to Consideration of Merits of Case

"Wisconsin Right to Life is elated to learn of the unanimous decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in Wisconsin Right to Life v. Federal Election Commission to remove an obstacle created by a lower court in the District of Columbia," declared Barbara Lyons, Executive Director of Wisconsin Right to Life. "The lower court in its ruling incorrectly concluded that the Supreme Court had precluded 'as applied' challenges to the McCain-Feingold law. The Supreme Court clarified in today's ruling that 'as applied'challenges are proper and asked the District Court to review the merits of the case."

In the summer of 2004, Wisconsin Right to Life aired radio and television ads informing the public of filibusters occurring in the U.S. Senate over President Bush's judicial nominees. The ads asked the public to contact Senators Kohl and Feingold and urge them to oppose the filibusters. Because Senator Feingold was a candidate for re-election and his name was on the primary election ballot, Wisconsin Right to Life went to court to ask permission to continue airing the ads into the blackout period created by the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform law. That law creates a blackout period which prohibits organizations and corporations from mentioning the name of someone in a broadcast ad whose name is on the ballot 30 days before a primary election and 60 days before a general election. Penalties for simply mentioning the name of a candidate in the blackout periods are criminal in nature and include prison sentences as well as significant fines.

"Wisconsin Right to Life is asking for a grassroots lobbying exception to the McCain-Feingold law as long as the ads talk about a genuine issue before the U.S. Congress and do not mention an election," continued Lyons. "The lower court became fixated on a footnote in the 2003 Supreme Court decision and concluded that there could be no 'as applied'challenges to McCain-Feingold. Fortunately, that obstacle is now removed and we look forward to the District Court getting to the merits of the case. "

"Numerous diverse organizations have joined Wisconsin Right to Life, recognizing that our rights to free speech, to associate, and to influence legislation, are being abridged as we have been left out of the legislative process in terms of broadcast ads. We welcome with great excitement a proper review of the merits of our appeal and are optimistic that free speech will once again be recognized in the United States," concluded Lyons.

This is a start. I never could understand how the government could deem the same speech ok one day and illegal the next. It's not a liberal-conservative thing. It's about the right of individuals and groups to comment to and about the government that serves them.