|
 |
Ohio Citizen Action is committed to a fair and impartial judiciary. The rapidly rising cost of Ohio judicial elections, along with the well-funded efforts by interest groups to influence the outcomes of these races, raises serious concerns about the judiciary’s independence and impartiality. The Money in Politics Project produces studies examining campaign contributions to those serving on the Ohio Supreme Court.
Recent News
Jan 25: Editorial: Corporations didn’t need more rights
WASHINGTON DC -- "The court has ruled that corporations may use unlimited amounts of their own money on federal elections. That overturns a 63-year-old law federal. Ohio has a similar law.
And the corporations (and presumably unions) are no longer banned from funding 'issue-oriented' ads out of their general fund in the two months before an election, as they were under McCain-Feingold.
However, the corporations may still not give money directly to candidates. (The court was silent on that.) And the part of McCain-Feingold that banned unlimited contributions to national parties remains in force," Dayton Dayly News.
Stunning show of judicial activism
Erwin Chemerinsky, Akron Beacon Journal.
McCain says campaign finance reform is dead
Associated Press.
Jan 22: Expect an 'onslaught' of Ohio political ads this fall, thanks to Supreme Court on corporations and free speech
WASHINGTON DC -- "That's Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner's advice for Americans this fall, when they could get caught in an onslaught of TV, radio and Internet political commercials, the velocity and volume of which we've never seen. The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday opened the gates for a new level of discourse, ruling 5-4 that corporations have a constitutional right to political communication. That means they can use shareholder money, and labor unions can use membership money, to run ads, show critical movies, mock or praise politicians, and urge voters to support or oppose candidates for election.
They'll be able to spend as much as they wish," Sabrina Eaton and Reginald Fields, Cleveland Plain Dealer.
Ruling could render Ohio's campaign-spending law toothless
Mark Niquette, The Columbus Dispatch.
Jan 21: High Court rolls back campaign spending limits
WASHINGTON DC -- "The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday struck down key provisions of some of the central laws governing how the nation's political campaigns are financed just ahead of the pivotal 2010 midterm congressional primaries and election season.
By a 5-4 vote, the court ruled that corporations may spend freely to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress, overturning a 20-year-old ruling.
It could take weeks to sort through the full ramifications of the landmark ruling, but its ripple effects could endanger federal limits on corporate and union contributions to candidates, as well as other measures that restrict how political ads are regulated. The ruling could unleash a flow of new corporate cash into the political realm," Deborah Tedford, Liz Halloran, National Public Radio.
Timeline: America's campaign finance rules
Supreme Court ends campaign-spending limits for corporations, unions
Ruling might have major effect on this fall's elections
Mark Sherman, Associated Press.
Jan 13: Giving corporations an outsized voice in elections
Voters stand to lose out if the Supreme Court treats political spending by businesses and other big-money players as protected speech.
LOS ANGELES -- "Corporations are pitching a bizarre product -- a radical vision of the 1st Amendment. It would give corporations rather than voters a central role in our electoral process by treating corporate political spending as protected speech. If this vision becomes reality, businesses and other big-money players will spend billions either hyping their preferred candidates or running attack ads against elected officials who don't support their preferred agenda. Voters will be forced into a couch-potato role, mere viewers of the electoral spectacle bought and paid for by wealthy companies.
The Supreme Court's decision in the hotly anticipated campaign finance reform case Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission -- which may be announced as early as Tuesday -- will show whether a majority of the Roberts court is buying their argument," Monica Youn, Los Angeles Times
Jan 5: News from the bench
COLUMBUS-- "Keeping tabs on the Ohio Supreme Court just got a lot easier.
Following the FBI, U.S. Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies, the court has launched a free news service which allows users to receive updates through e-mail or text message.... While other government entities at both the federal and state levels have been utilizing such systems, the Ohio Supreme Court is believed to be the first court in the United States to launch the service," Catherine Candisky, The Columbus Dispatch.
The Supreme Court of ohio & The Ohio Judicial System.
|
|
|
News archive
2009
See which states have elected judges and which have appointed judges
Full audio recording of the argument of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
Nina Totenberg's overview of the argument 3:56 min.
Articles on Caperton v. Massey
Letter to Chief Justice calling for recusal study committee
U.S. Supreme Court decision
Brief of amicus curiae
good government groups including Ohio Citizen Action in support of Caperton
$ to Candidates for Ohio Supreme Court Justice
|
