The Koch brothers' historical defense of anonymous political donationsBreaking News
tags: campaign finance, political donations
Tappan cited two pre-Citizens United Supreme Court decisions, the 1958 ruling in N.A.A.C.P. v. Alabama and the 1995 decision in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission.
The McIntyre case involved the charge that Margaret McIntyre, an Ohio resident, had violated state law by distributing, at a public forum in Westerville, Ohio, unsigned leaflets she had written in opposition to raising school taxes.
On behalf of the majority in the 7-2 decision, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote: “Under our Constitution, anonymous pamphleteering is not a pernicious, fraudulent practice, but an honorable tradition of advocacy and of dissent. Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation — and their ideas from suppression — at the hand of an intolerant society.”
In N.A.A.C.P. v. Alabama, the court ruled that the demand of the Alabama attorney general for the N.A.A.C.P.'s membership list violated “the right of petitioner’s members to pursue their lawful private interests privately and to associate freely with others in doing so as to come within the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment.”...
comments powered by Disqus
- How Tina Turner Escaped Abuse and Reclaimed her Name
- The Biden Administration Wants to Undo the Damage of Urban Highways. It Won't be Simple
- AAUP: Fight Tooth and Nail Against Florida's Higher Ed Agenda Because Your State is Next
- Texas GOP's Ten Commandments School Bill Fails
- Former Alabama Governors: We Regret Overseeing Executions
- Jeff Sharlet on the Intersectional Erotics of Fascism
- Scholars Stage Teach-in on Racism in DeSantis's Back Yard
- Paul Watanabe, Historian and Manzanar Survivor, Makes Sure History Isn't Forgotten
- Massachusetts-Based Historians: Book Bans in Florida Affect Us, Too
- Deborah Lipstadt's Work Abroad as Antisemitism Envoy Complicated by Definitional Dispute