2016 Postmortem

dsc

(53,349 posts)

8. that is a complete misrepresentation of what the court did

Mon Jun 16, 2014, 11:49 PM

Jun 2014

The case was about whether the group had the right to sue over the law. The group placed a bill board ad which they were forced to remove. They then sued but were denied standing on the grounds that they couldn't prove the law would be enforced against them in the future. This says they can sue. On the merits, I do think that having a group of political appointees given power to force campaigns not to run ads based on what that group determines is false is rife with potential for abuse.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

15 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Supremes says that lying is "a-ok" with them [View all] angrychair Jun 2014 OP

This message was self-deleted by its author Adam051188 Jun 2014 #1

Premature angst. silverweb Jun 2014 #2

If they vote against lying then we can bring back the Fairness Doctrine. joshcryer Jun 2014 #7

If the USSC is imthevicar Jun 2014 #11

What else is new Pakid Jun 2014 #3

So Republicans can ban dem ads for "lying?" Cicada Jun 2014 #4

I think they only sent it back to the lower courts that blocked the suit proceeding. Fred Sanders Jun 2014 #5

If it wasn't for lying MurrayDelph Jun 2014 #6

^This.^ blkmusclmachine Jun 2014 #10

that is a complete misrepresentation of what the court did dsc Jun 2014 #8

Thanks for the voice of sanity. JayhawkSD Jun 2014 #9

+ 12 quadrillion "I do think that having a group of political appointees given power to force stevenleser Jun 2014 #14

I hope that law is struck down real quick. NYC Liberal Jun 2014 #12

They did not just decide to take the case: it was heard this term. The opinion was issued this past Princess Turandot Jun 2014 #13

Good thing there isn't a law against lying about what the USSC says. :) FBaggins Jun 2014 #15