Yesterday the US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus
, a case in which the Freedom to Read Foundation submitted an amicus
brief in February. The case involves the right to challenge laws, prior to their enforcement, that potential plaintiffs feel could infringe on their First Amendment rights. FTRF wrote about the case in our most recent newsletter
. Yesterday's arguments involved whether Susan B. Anthony List had standing to challenge the constitutionality of an Ohio law on "false" campaign-related speech.
Our friends at Media Coalition
have compiled an excellent list of resources to help you understand the case, and the importance of FTRF's involvement:
- Transcript of oral arguments
- Q&A with Media Coalition Executive Director David Horowitz
- SCOTUSBlog has a thorough overview of the oral argument, pointing out that the justices seemed more intent on questioning the constitutionality of the Ohio law than addressing the "standing" question
- Slate's coverage
- Wall Street Journal article on Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine, whose office defended the Ohio elections commission in court even though he submitted a brief challenging the law's constitutionality, as "a representative of the people and the public interest"
- "And lastly, the case caught the interest of satirist Andy Borowitz, who wrote on his New Yorker column, 'Supreme Court Calls Lying by Politicians an Expression of their Religion.'"
For more information on this case, visit FTRF's Current Litigation
page and Media Coalition's SBAL v. Driehaus
page, which includes an interactive map of where facial challenges have been brought in federal court.