Group behind attack ads fights Ohio election law

Friday, February 23, 2001

By T.C.BROWN
PLAIN DEALER BUREAU

COLUMBUS - The U.S. Chamber of Commerce argued yesterday that Ohio laws regulating political advertisements are too vague and conflict with federal law.

The chamber, which aired a nasty series of commercials last fall suggesting that a state Supreme Court justice traded her support for campaign contributions, contends those ads were a protected form of free speech.

But the Ohio Elections Commission is investigating whether the ads aimed at Justice Alice Robie Resnick are subject to state election laws requiring that donors’ names be disclosed.

The chamber is asking U.S. District Judge Edmund A. Sargus to determine that Ohio laws are out of step with federal elections laws. Under federal statutes, a commercial is not considered political unless it contains explicit language advocating the election or defeat of a candidate.

The chamber, which has said its Resnick ads were issue-oriented and therefore not subject to the disclosure requirement, argued in legal documents that it is "presently being chilled from engaging in any political speech at all in Ohio because it cannot determine how Ohio officials will draw the line between what is express advocacy’ and what is not."

Thomas W. Kirby, the attorney representing the chamber, told Sargus that a "bright line standard" is needed in Ohio law for "people who engage in political speech who could be subject to criminal penalty."

Yesterday, Sargus hinted his jurisdiction could be limited because the issue may be grounded in defamation of character laws, not elections statutes. A U.S. Supreme Court ruling on federal election law cited by the chamber in its arguments does not address defamation, he said.

The chamber also is asking the judge to allow the intervention of a "John Doe" candidate, who would represent a party injured by the Ohio election law in the case.

"He wishes to speak and contribute [to campaigns] but cannot do so. He must sit silent while this makes its way through the court process," said Matthew A. Kairis, the attorney representing "John Doe." Sargus gave Kairis until Monday to file legal documents arguing why "John Doe" should remain anonymous.

The U.S. Chamber, its Ohio affiliate and Citizens for a Strong Ohio, a pro-business group, spent more than $5 million in advertisements aimed at Resnick during last campaign season.

Resnick defeated Cleveland Judge Terrence O’Donnell of the 8th Ohio District Court of Appeals, winning her third six-year term on the Supreme Court.

Sharon Jennings, an assistant attorney general representing the elections commission, told Sargus yesterday that he should not interfere with the state process. The Ohio Elections Commission has a hearing scheduled in April.

"Proceedings were already under way in the Ohio Elections Commission when this was filed [in federal court]," Jennings said. "Ohio courts deserve the opportunity to interpret their own statutes."

Sargus said he would issue a ruling "in the next several weeks."

E-mail: tcbrown@plaind.com

Phone: 216-999-4213

©2001 THE PLAIN DEALER. Used with permission.