Free speech victory...well not really
 

In a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court upheld an appeals court ruling involving a Wisconsin groups commercials before the 2004 election.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070625/...ign_finance_10

However, two out of the 5, (Roberts and Alito) voted to uphold this challenge to McCain-Feingold in this rather narrow case. They did not vote to overturn the general principle involved: that the government can ban ads 60 days before an election paid for by private groups. Not surprisingly the Bush Administration favored the position of its two appointees.

How 6 out of 9 Supreme Court Justices believe that this is not a violation of the First Amendment is simply amazing.

Re: Free speech victory...well not really
 

[ QUOTE ]
How 6 out of 9 Supreme Court Justices believe that this is not a violation of the First Amendment is simply amazing.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's possible this isn't true. Roberts' big thing is trying to build consensus (and avoid 5-4 decisions) by making rulings as narrow as possible to decide a case. Whether or not the law is unconstitutional isn't necessary to decide the case if the ads weren't even covered by the statute. I haven't read the case, so I'm just speculating, but it's possible that if an unambiguous case came up Roberts and Alito might find the statute unconstitutional.

Re: Free speech victory...well not really
 

From the article linked to:

Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito said only that the Wisconsin group's ads are not the equivalent of explicit campaign ads and are not covered by the court's 2003 decision.

Sounds to me like the door is still open to more successful challenges to McCain-Feingold but could be convinced otherwise.

Re: Free speech victory...well not really
 

[ QUOTE ]
From the article linked to:

Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito said only that the Wisconsin group's ads are not the equivalent of explicit campaign ads and are not covered by the court's 2003 decision.

Sounds to me like the door is still open to more successful challenges to McCain-Feigngold but could be convinced otherwise.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not very likely. SCOTUS ruled in 2003 that most of the law, including the restrictions on outside advertising, were Constitutional. Its rare for a decision to be overturned 4 years after its handed down.

Re: Free speech victory...well not really
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
From the article linked to:

Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito said only that the Wisconsin group's ads are not the equivalent of explicit campaign ads and are not covered by the court's 2003 decision.

Sounds to me like the door is still open to more successful challenges to McCain-Feigngold but could be convinced otherwise.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not very likely. SCOTUS ruled in 2003 that most of the law, including the restrictions on outside advertising, were Constitutional. Its rare for a decision to be overturned 4 years after its handed down.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was one challenge that succeeded. More challenges on the way for sure.