September 10, 2019
Protecting Free Speech in Electioneering Communications: FEC v. Wisconsin Right To Life
In June 2007, the United States Supreme Court ruled in FEC. v. Wisconsin Right To Life (“WRTL”), by a 5-4 decision, that section 203 of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (“BCRA”) was unconstitutional. The Court’s majority, however, could not agree to why BCRA was unconstitutional. The opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts held that there is a distinction between “issue advocacy” and “express advocacy” in the context of federal elections, and it was constitutionally impermissible for them to be lumped together. The concurring opinion by Justice Scalia held section 203 never should have been upheld in McConnell v. FEC, and BCRA is facially unconstitutional. The effect of the WRTL decision is that corporations and unions may now broadcast issue ads on television and radio using their general treasury funds in the days leading up to a federal primary or general election.
Matthew W. Modell, Recent Development, Protecting Free Speech in Electioneering Communications: FEC v. Wisconsin Right To Life , 9 N.C. J.L. & Tech. On. 30 (2007), http://ncjolt.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/20_9NCJLTech302007-2008.pdf.
The North Carolina Journal of Law & Technology has adopted the Open Access Program, a part of the Scholar’s Copyright Project created by Science Commons. Authors designate the conditions under which their articles are licensed. By downloading articles, you agree to comply with the license terms specified. Please contact NC JOLT at email@example.com with permissions inquiries.