Government,
9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
May 3, 2018
9th Circuit ruling on Montana campaign finance law could head to U.S. Supreme Court
Five conservative-leaning judges dissented from a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision not to rehear en banc a challenge to Montana’s campaign contribution restrictions, arguing that recent U.S. Supreme Court precedent has significantly narrowed the compelling interests states have in limiting commercial speech.
Five conservative-leaning judges dissented from a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision not to rehear en banc a challenge to Montana's campaign contribution restrictions Wednesday, arguing that recent U.S. Supreme Court precedent has significantly narrowed compelling interests states have in limiting commercial speech.
Judge Sandra S. Ikuta, who wrote the dissent, said the circuit's own precedent regarding this question was no l...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$895, but save $100 when you subscribe today… Just $795 for the first year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In
Enewsletter Sign-up
Related Content
Constitutional Law
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
Government prohibition of expenditures by corporations violates First Amendment right to free speech.
Constitutional Law
McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission
Aggregate limits on political contributions, which limit how much money individuals may contribute to campaigns during election cycles, violate First Amendment.
Civil Rights
Lair v. Motl
Montana's limits on campaign contributions improperly invalidated, where limits are justified by state's interest in preventing quid pro quo corruption.
