WASHINGTON – Campaign finance reform emerged as a major theme of the coming Supreme Court term on Tuesday, as the justices announced that they would rule on federal and state efforts to regulate campaign advertising by advocacy groups and limit spending by candidates.
The first case is a challenge to provisions of the 2002 McCain-Feingold Act, which prevents corporations or labor unions from buying ads with unregulated money for a specified candidate in the weeks just before an election.
Wisconsin anti-abortion activists say their proposed ads are a genuine effort to express their views on an issue, and are not attacks on candidates disguised as issue ads or the sham issue ads the law was meant to regulate.
The second case accepted Tuesday involves three consolidated challenges to a 1997 Vermont law that puts a ceiling on how much a candidate for state office can spend.
Releasing a list of cases that will be reviewed in the new term, the Supreme Court on Tuesday:
* Agreed to decide how states may use tax incentives to lure companies to build car plants and other projects.
* Said it would consider former Playboy model Anna Nicole Smith’s appeal over the $1.6 billion fortune of her 90-year-old late husband, which was awarded to his son.
* Announced that it would use an appeal from Merrill Lynch to clarify when companies may face state class-action suits based on claims that the companies misled investors.
* Said it would decide how much effort governments must make before seizing someone’s property for unpaid taxes.
* Agreed to consider how much of a person’s lawsuit winnings can be taken by the government to cover health expenses paid for through Medicaid.
* Agreed to use the case of a Florida man convicted of second-degree murder to clarify time limits for state inmates to file federal appeals.
* Said it would review two cases from California involving claims of unconstitutional searches by police.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
