Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

MohRokTah

(15,429 posts)
Mon Jun 16, 2014, 01:21 PM Jun 2014

The Unanimous SCOTUS Decision in SBA List v. Driehaus is extremely important.

The long and the short of it, politicians and political groups have a constitutionally guaranteed right to LIE in political advertisements.

The reason I consider this to be extremely important is we can use it to constantly remind people political advertisement is rarely ever honest.

The decision as penned by Associate Justice Clarence Thomas.

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Unanimous SCOTUS Decision in SBA List v. Driehaus is extremely important. (Original Post) MohRokTah Jun 2014 OP
I know US election law is pretty messed up, but seriously? DeadLetterOffice Jun 2014 #1
This is a terrible law that certainly violates the First Amendment and should be overturned. Nye Bevan Jun 2014 #2
I agree. MohRokTah Jun 2014 #3
You haven't actually read the case or decision yet, have you? Lee-Lee Jun 2014 #4
The law cannot stand. MohRokTah Jun 2014 #5

DeadLetterOffice

(1,352 posts)
1. I know US election law is pretty messed up, but seriously?
Mon Jun 16, 2014, 01:42 PM
Jun 2014

So, SBA essentially wants to get rid of an Ohio law that makes it illegal to lie in political advertising.

Because telling the truth in political advertising would be... bad. Having an accurately informed electorate would be... bad.

Nye Bevan

(25,406 posts)
2. This is a terrible law that certainly violates the First Amendment and should be overturned.
Mon Jun 16, 2014, 01:47 PM
Jun 2014

Most campaign claims are not 100% true or false. There are half-truths, statements that are true but misleading, statements that are open to differing interpretations, and so on. The Washington Post fact checker, for example, does not adjudge statements "true" or "false" but awards between one and four "pinnochios" depending on the degree to which they see the statement as misleading.

With such a law in place, whoever gets to decide on whether a political claim is "true" or "false" has an extraordinary amount of power to censor political speech. Imagine a billboard that claimed "Bush Lied Us Into War" being ordered removed because the claimant could not prove the literal truth of this statement.

 

MohRokTah

(15,429 posts)
3. I agree.
Mon Jun 16, 2014, 01:58 PM
Jun 2014

I find the greater importance of the decision the fact that it's timely during an election cycle to aid us in reminding people those politica ads are almost never honest.

 

Lee-Lee

(6,324 posts)
4. You haven't actually read the case or decision yet, have you?
Mon Jun 16, 2014, 02:14 PM
Jun 2014

This ruling did not uphold the right to lie.

At issue before the court was if SBA had standing to challenge the law. They ruled they do have standing, so now the real issue will work its way through the system.

Huge difference.

 

MohRokTah

(15,429 posts)
5. The law cannot stand.
Mon Jun 16, 2014, 02:30 PM
Jun 2014

It's blatantly unconstitutional.

The only thing standing between the law being overturned at a lower level was the issue of standing. That's settled now.

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals must now hear the case as a first amendment case. There's no way they can rule the law constitutional now.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Unanimous SCOTUS Deci...