God's Supreme Court strikes again, and again, and again, and again….
25 Jun 2007
Please write to: firstname.lastname@example.org for inquiries.
In drawing that line, the First Amendment requires us to err on the side of protecting political speech rather than suppressing it.
We conclude that the speech at issue in this as-applied challenge is not the functional equivalent of express campaign speech. We further conclude that the interests held to justify restricting corporate campaign speech or its functional equivalent do not justify restricting issue advocacy, and accordingly we hold that BCRA Â§203 is unconstitutional as applied to the advertisements at issue in these cases .