U.S. Chamber wins round in campaign-ads case

By The Associated Press

04.09.02

Printer-friendly page

Editor's note: On April 25, Mississippi Attorney General Mike Moore and Secretary of State Eric Clark asked the full 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to hear the case, saying campaign expenditure regulations in the state would be rendered "meaningless" if the panel's ruling is allowed to stand.

JACKSON, Miss. — The U.S. Chamber of Commerce does not have to publicly reveal how much it spent on a television advertising campaign for Mississippi Supreme Court candidates, a federal appeals court ruled late last week..

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans overturned a ruling by U.S. District Judge Henry T. Wingate.

In November 2000, Wingate ruled in favor of Mississippi Attorney General Mike Moore and Secretary of State Eric Clark, rejecting the chamber's argument that it was exempt from state regulations governing the reporting of campaign expenditures.

The appeals court said April 5 that Wingate's ruling goes against the chamber's First Amendment right to free speech.

"The government may regulate only those communications containing explicit words advocating the election or defeat of a particular candidate," the court said.

U.S. Chamber officials had argued that so long as the ads didn't contain words like 'vote for' or 'defeat,' the slick advertisements were educational rather than candidate advocacy.

The 5th Circuit agreed, saying the chamber did not "express advocacy" for anyone in the election despite the ads' criticism of some candidates for past rulings from the bench.

"We are gratified (the) 5th Circuit has joined five other circuits and the U.S. Supreme Court in affirming the rights of advocacy groups to communicate with the public," said Jim Wootton, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Institute for Legal Reform.

The 5th Circuit said even though their ruling was the right one "the result we reached in this case may be counter-intuitive to a commonsense understanding of the message conveyed by the television political advertisements at issue."

The nation's chief business lobby still faces legal challenges after weighing in on judicial races in several states, including Ohio and Michigan.

An Ohio case questions ads against Ohio Supreme Court Justice Alice Robie Resnick's campaign. A judge dismissed the lawsuit and an appeal has been filed.

Special Mississippi Assistant Attorney General Hunt Cole said last week's ruling is likely to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

"We are obviously disappointed in the result reach by this 5th Circuit panel. We do agree with one statement in the opinion where the court said the result we reached is 'counterintuitive to a commonsense,' " Cole said.

"There isn't anybody out there watching these TV ads ... that doesn't know what those ads want you to do. The mere fact that someone doesn't say 'vote' ... we don't believe that's what the Supreme Court has required."

David Blount, a spokesman for the secretary of state's office, said more legal challenges are expected.

"The first sentence in the last paragraph is classic," Blount said about the Court of Appeals' statement about commonsense.

"Our position is these ads are political ads and anybody who sees these ads knows that they are seeing a political commercial. The money that's spent ought to be disclosed to the public."

Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court, without comment, refused to hear a separate free-speech complaint brought by the Chamber. In that lawsuit, the Chamber argued that a Mississippi court violated its First Amendment right to free expression by blocking the group's ads critical of three judges.

Update

Mississippi asks high court to hear U.S. Chamber campaign-ads case
State argues that without some clarification by Supreme Court, other states' election-finance disclosure laws could be meaningless.  08.28.02

Previous

Federal judge: U.S. Chamber-sponsored campaign commercials aren't issue ads
Court says TV ads expressly advocate candidates for Mississippi Supreme Court; business group must disclose donors, expenditures.  11.03.00

Related

Supreme Court won't weigh in on Chamber of Commerce election ads
Business lobby had argued Mississippi court violated its free-speech rights by blocking TV ads criticizing three judicial candidates.  05.29.01

Ohio elections commission can investigate campaign ad fund
In California, lobbyists' group sues over campaign-finance measure.  03.10.01

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