On the final day of its 2010-11 term, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt Arizona Clean Elections system of financing for state political campaigns matching blows on Monday.
The justices, on a 5-4 split decision (opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts), issued an opinion in the consolidated cases of McComish (State Sen. John) v. Bennett (Secy of State Ken) and Arizona's Free Enterprise Club Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett, holding that the matching funds provisions of the Clean Elections law passed by Arizona voters in 1998 violate the First Amendment. The decision overturns the 9th Circuit, but vindicates District Court Judge Roslyn Silver.
The split was along expected lines: Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Alito, and Thomas joined the Chief Justice in the majority. Justice Kagan wrote the dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer and Sotomayor.
Here is a link to the opinions; we will hopefully have some analysis shortly. (Thanks to http://www.scotusblog.com/ for their fine live coverage of the Supreme Court!)
(BONUS Supreme Court coverage: Led by Justice Scalia, the Court holds that California's law restricting the sale of violent video games also violates the First Amendment.
We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.
Showing posts with label Clean Elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Clean Elections. Show all posts
Monday, June 27, 2011
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Arizona Clean Elections In "The Final Four"; Opinion To Come Down On Monday
The eagerly-awaited U.S. Supreme Court opinion on a core of Arizona's Clean Elections campaign financing system will almost certainly be issued this coming Monday. The Supreme Court issued six opinions earlier today, leaving only the Clean Elections case and three others to be decided.
The nine Justices traditionally adjourn at the end of June for the summer, and the 27th is the last scheduled day for handing down opinions; it would be highly unusual for the decision not to be announced Monday morning. Opinions announced near the ends of Supreme Court terms are much more likely to be difficult, divided decisions, often with multiple concurring and dissenting opinions.
The twin cases of Arizona Free Enterprise Club v. Bennett and John McComish v. Bennett challenge the matching funds provisions of the Clean Elections law that was passed by Arizona voters in 1998. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on March 28.
The Supreme Court is just about at the end of its 2010-11 Term, and has not yet
We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.
The nine Justices traditionally adjourn at the end of June for the summer, and the 27th is the last scheduled day for handing down opinions; it would be highly unusual for the decision not to be announced Monday morning. Opinions announced near the ends of Supreme Court terms are much more likely to be difficult, divided decisions, often with multiple concurring and dissenting opinions.
The twin cases of Arizona Free Enterprise Club v. Bennett and John McComish v. Bennett challenge the matching funds provisions of the Clean Elections law that was passed by Arizona voters in 1998. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on March 28.
The Supreme Court is just about at the end of its 2010-11 Term, and has not yet
We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)