Headlines Tagged with ScotusSuit — 297 headlines found
A sharply-divided US Supreme Court engaged in a pointed debate on Tuesday over whether limiting the total amount of money an individual can give to federal candidates and political committees violates the free-speech rights of would-be campaign contributo
Oct 9, 2013 Christian Science Monitor
added Oct 9, 2013 16:58
Today's argument in McCutcheon over whether aggregate limits ... state parties and hundreds of candidates already transfer large sums of money to each other, using the national party groups as hubs.
Oct 9, 2013 Opensecrets.org (Center for Responsive Politics)
added Oct 9, 2013 16:55
the court appeared poised to take a narrower approach than it did in that 2010 decision, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, that cleared the way for increased independent corporate and union spending during federal elections.
Oct 8, 2013 Reuters
added Oct 9, 2013 16:52
What the aggregate limits do is not limit how much you can give to a particular candidate, but limit how many candidates you can support in an effective way," says James Bopp, McCutcheon's lawyer. Not so, say defenders of the aggregate limits.
Oct 9, 2013 National Public Radio (NPR)
added Oct 9, 2013 16:49
It's not a question of who gets to speak. Everybody gets to speak as much as they want to and in the ways that they find most effective." But campaign finance reformers vehemently disagreed
Oct 8, 2013 National Public Radio (NPR)
added Oct 9, 2013 16:48
Assessing all of the justices’ arguments, it sounds like Scalia’s sarcastic defense of First Amendment principles will prevail over Ginsburg’s anxiety about drowning out the voice of the “little people.”
Oct 9, 2013 Business Week/Bloomberg
added Oct 9, 2013 16:47
Without campaign contribution restrictions, the parties and candidates will be empowered to run campaigns that are not swamped by the parallel participation of these anonymously funded campaigns. I say “anonymously,” but that is not accurate; the identity
Oct 9, 2013 Washington Post
added Oct 9, 2013 16:44
signaled Tuesday that they aren’t sold on current campaign finance laws that limit how much Americans can contribute directly to candidates and political parties, as the court met for the first major oral argument of its new term.
Oct 9, 2013 Washington Times
added Oct 9, 2013 16:39
If the Supreme Court really does not understand how money moves around in American politics, how can it fashion constitutional rules to prevent abuses? That seemed to be the most penetrating question that hung over the one-hour hearing Tuesday on the lat
Oct 9, 2013 SCOTUSBlog
added Oct 9, 2013 16:33
justices sounded as though they were closely split along the usual ideological lines. Conservatives spoke of political free speech while liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg worried that only the voice of the “super-affluent” will be heard in Washington.
Oct 9, 2013 Los Angeles Times
added Oct 9, 2013 16:32