U.S. Chamber sues to block review of Ohio campaign ads
By The Associated Press
01.16.01
Printer-friendly page
COLUMBUS, Ohio — The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has filed a
lawsuit to prevent the Ohio Elections Commission from continuing to review the
legality of campaign commercials the chamber sponsored in November's state
Supreme Court election.
The suit was filed Jan. 12 before U.S. District Judge Edmund Sargus
Jr., who scheduled a hearing Feb. 22 to listen to arguments in the case.
The chamber said the ads, which contained harsh criticism of Supreme
Court Justice Alice Robie Resnick, were protected speech and shouldn't be the
target of a state investigation.
The ads were financed through a $5 million fund of a pro-business
group known as Citizens for a Strong Ohio, which received money from the
chamber.
In previous hearings before the elections commission, attorneys for
the group said it did not have to disclose the names of contributors because
the commercials were educational and issue-oriented and did not explicitly call
for Resnick's defeat.
They based their arguments on the U.S. Supreme Court's 1976 ruling in
Buckley v. Valeo and federal appeals
court opinions.
The ads implied that Resnick traded favorable decisions in exchange
for contributions from trial lawyers.
Resnick captured 57% of the vote in the election, defeating Republican
Terrence O'Donnell, a former state appeals court judge from Cleveland.
On the day before the election, an elections commission panel found
probable cause that the ads violated state law. Its 3-2 decision reversed two
rulings in which commissioners said the ads didn't violated campaign laws
because they didn't specifically call for the election or defeat of a
candidate.
The panel recommended that the full seven-member commission review the
commercials' legality. The commission has not ruled on the recommendation.
Previous
Avoiding 'magic words' allows advocacy groups to escape election rules
Ohio Elections Commission follows 1976 U.S. Supreme Court decision, ruling that campaign ad criticizing state high court justice didn't expressly advocate her defeat.
11.01.00
