Jesse J. Holland
Court fails to decide on anti-Hillary movie
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has failed to decide on whether a scathing documentary about Hillary Rodham Clinton that was shown during the presidential race should be regulated as if it were a campaign ad.
The court said Monday it will hear arguments in the case again in a special session on Sept. 9. The justices said they want lawyers to address whether the court should overturn its earlier rulings on limiting corporate and union contributions in federal elections.
Citizens United, a conservative not-for-profit group, wanted to air ads for the movie in Democratic primary states and also make the film available to cable subscribers on demand without complying with federal campaign finance law.
But lower courts have said the movie looked and sounded like a long campaign ad, and therefore should be regulated like one.
At the time of “Hillary: The Movie,” the New York senator was competing with Barack Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination. She is now secretary of state in the Obama administration.
The court’s composition will be different by the time it rehears the case. Justice David Souter plans to retire this month, and Obama has nominated Sonia Sotomayor, a judge from the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, to replace him.
Obama and Democrats hope the Senate confirms Sotomayor before the high court session in September.
The movie is unquestionably anti-Clinton, featuring commentary from conservative pundits, some of whom specifically say she was not fit to be commander in chief. One scene, which was used in an ad, shows Dick Morris describing the senator as “the closest thing we have in America to a European socialist.”
Morris, who once served as an adviser to former President Bill Clinton, is now one of the Clintons’ harshest critics.
Citizens United wanted to pay for its documentary to be shown on home video-on-demand, and for ads promoting the movie to be shown in competitive Democratic primary states.
Federal judges, however, said the movie should be regulated by the McCain-Feingold law, the popular name for 2002 revisions to the nation’s campaign finance law. Judges called “Hillary: The Movie” a 90-minute attack ad, rulings that would require Citizens United to identify the financial backers for the ads if they were to appear on television.
The court also said that if the group showed the movie on cable television, financial backers would have to be named and the group would have to pay the cost of airing the movie.
The movie was advertised on the Internet, sold on DVD and shown in a few theaters. Campaign regulations do not apply to DVDs, theaters or the Internet.
The case is Citizens United v. FEC, 08-205.
On the Net:
“Hillary: The Movie”: www.hillarythemovie.com
Federal Election Commission: www.fec.gov
Background on the case: tinyurl.com/cfltxp
Related News
Appeals court overturns rules limiting how much nonprofits can spend on political campaignsSeptember 18th, 2009 Appeals court overturns campaign finance rulesWASHINGTON — Independent advocacy groups will be able to spend more money to try to influence federal elections under a decision Friday from a federal appeals court that overturned rules limiting nonprofits' campaign spending. Three judges of the U.S.
Group of American Indians asks Supreme Court to decide whether Redskins' name is offensiveSeptember 15th, 2009 Indians ask Supreme Court if 'Redskins' offendsWASHINGTON — A group of American Indians who find the Washington Redskins name offensive wants the Supreme Court to take up the matter. The group on Monday asked the justices to review a lower court decision that favored the NFL team on a legal technicality.
Supreme Court receptive to arguments for freer campaign spending by businesses, unionsSeptember 9th, 2009 Supreme Court receptive to freer election spendingWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court signaled Wednesday it may let businesses and unions spend freely to help their favored political candidates in time for next year's elections. In a case that began with a movie attacking Hillary Rodham Clinton, newly seated Justice Sonia Sotomayor jumped right into the questioning.
Wasting no time, Sotomayor jumps in to question lawyers in first argument at the Supreme CourtSeptember 9th, 2009 Sonia Sotomayor jumps in to question lawyersWASHINGTON — Twenty minutes into her first argument as a Supreme Court justice, Sonia Sotomayor wasn't shy about taking on two legal heavyweights in an important case that could open a door to a flood of corporate campaign spending. First, Sotomayor went head-to-head with Theodore Olson, a prominent conservative who has argued 56 cases before the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court hears arguments on lifting restrictions on corporate campaign spendingSeptember 9th, 2009 Supreme Court arguments under way in campaign caseWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court, in a case that arose from a film attacking Hillary Rodham Clinton, wrestled on Wednesday with whether to overturn prohibitions on political campaign spending by corporations and labor unions. Newly seated Justice Sonia Sotomayor jumped right into the questioning.
Return engagement at Supreme Court for anti-Hillary Clinton movie in campaign finance caseSeptember 9th, 2009 'Hillary: The Movie' gets new airing at high courtWASHINGTON — "Hillary: The Movie" is returning to the Supreme Court for a limited engagement and with the chance to overhaul laws governing federal campaigns ranging from the White House to Congress. The justices were hearing arguments in the case Wednesday for the second time.
A brief look at the campaign finance laws at stake in the Supreme Court 'Hillary" movie caseSeptember 5th, 2009 Campaign finance laws before the Supreme CourtThe federal and state campaign finance laws and legal interpretations of them at stake as the Supreme Court hears a reargument of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission:
The court asked lawyers to answer this question: "Should the Court overrule either or both Austin v.
A brief look at the people of interest involved in Supreme Court's 'Hillary' argumentsSeptember 5th, 2009 Brief look at the major players in 'Hillary' caseA brief look at some of the people involved in the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission arguments in front of the Supreme Court on Sept.
What groups are telling the Supreme Court about campaign finance laws in the 'Hillary' caseSeptember 5th, 2009 What groups are telling court about 'Hillary' caseA brief look at what different groups are telling the Supreme Court about the current campaign finance laws in the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case to be argued Sept.
Could 'Hillary: The Movie' lead Supreme Court to wipe away some campaign spending limits?September 5th, 2009 Hillary movie puts campaign finance limits at riskWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court appears poised to wipe away limits on campaign spending by corporations and labor unions in time for next year's congressional elections in a case that began as a dispute over a movie about Hillary Rodham Clinton. The justices return to the bench Sept.
Supreme Court will provide audio soon after arguments in Clinton movie campaign finance caseSeptember 4th, 2009 Court to give same-day audio in Clinton movie caseWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court will release audio tapes soon after Wednesday's argument in a case about limits on campaign spending by corporations and labor unions. The court said Friday it has agreed to a request by the C-SPAN cable network for the quick release of audio in the case that involves a movie, made by a conservative group, that was harshly critical of Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential ambitions.
Court signals review of campaign finance laws, raising stakes in anti-Hillary movie caseJune 29th, 2009 Court raises stakes in anti-Hillary movieWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court signaled Monday that it could overturn decades-old laws on how money is spent on federal elections, raising the stakes in a case about a scathing documentary about Hillary Rodham Clinton. The high court was expected to release a decision on the Citizens United movie as part of its end-of-the-term wrap up, but in an unusual move the justices said they will hear arguments in the case again in a special session Sept.
Supreme Court to decide discrimination case, say goodbye to Souter in Monday wrap-upJune 27th, 2009 Supreme Court to decide final 3 cases on MondayWASHINGTON — A closely watched discrimination lawsuit by white firefighters who say they have unfairly been denied promotions is one of three remaining Supreme Court cases awaiting resolution Monday. The court intends to finish its work for the summer that day, Chief Justice John Roberts said.
Supreme Court cases still to be decidedJune 27th, 2009 Supreme Court cases still to be decidedHighlights of the three remaining cases the Supreme Court is expected to decide Monday at its last public session until October:
—Reverse discrimination: White firefighters in New Haven, Conn., claim they were discriminated against when the city tossed out the results of a promotion exam because too few minorities scored high enough. The city says it acted because it might have been vulnerable to claims that the exam had a "disparate impact" on minorities in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Supreme Court to decide whether to limit 'business method' patentsJune 1st, 2009 Court to decide whether to limit patentsWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has decided to take on an appeal that could decide whether someone can get a patent for a complex business idea. The high court on Monday decided to hear an appeal from Bernard Bilski and Rand Warsaw, who attempted to patent a method for managing weather-related risk having to do with trading in commodities.
Loading ...