We've seen so many swiftboat-type ads that contain blatant lies and slanderous allegations. Why haven't any of these been challenged in court? (civil or maybe criminal)
So now if a corporate-sponsored campaign does the same, shouldn't someone be suing them for any inaccuracy they broadcast? Why aren't we seeing this? Maybe trial lawyers should get together to defend candidates from slander & police these ads. Free speech doesn't include slander - whether it's a corporation or a person doing the free (paid) speaking.
1. I imagine SCOTUS will be overwhelmed with responses
to this ruling by so many parties attempting to overturn it
I only pray that "Corporate Personhood" is successfully challenged and overturned once and for all. There seems to be an apple supply of intent by the Constitutional Framers (founding fathers) that Corporations be limited in their reach and scope
2. There is an FCC rule which prohibits broadcasters from censoring or refusing to run campaign ads.
The ad can be full of misinformation and distortions, but they are obligated to run it.
That complicates the ability to pursue judicial relief for such activity.
The other problem is that the tort of libel requires that you demonstrate harm. Since elective office is not the property of the candidate, losing it is not a loss for which a remedy can be fashioned.
The asses who instigated this case wanted to air a smear-film about Hillary on national TV. IF they were able to, and IF someone sought legal recourse against them in civil court, the damage would have been done and the elections long since over.
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.