Citizens United A.V. Club: On this evening’s broadcast of the CBS Evening News, Jan Crawford had this video report.
This evening’s broadcast of the PBS show “The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer” contained video segments entitled “High Court Reverses Campaign Spending Limits” and “Implications of Supreme Court Ruling.”
This evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered” contained audio segments entitled “Supreme Court Eases Campaign Finance Curbs” (featuring Nina Totenberg); “Lawmakers Weigh Ruling On Campaign Finance“; and “Opposing Views Of Campaign Finance Decision.”
Today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Talk of the Nation” contained an audio segment entitled “Supreme Court Lifts Campaign Spending Limits” featuring David G. Savage.
And C-SPAN has posted this video of reactions to today’s ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court‘s plaza.
Lyle Denniston of “SCOTUSblog” is reporting: He has posts titled “The personhood of corporations” and “A new law to offset Citizens United? The President calls for action.”
In Bashman news from Australia: Northern Territory News of Darwin, Australia reports today that “30 thugs bash man in street.”
“Courts Write Own Rules On Detainees, Study Says”: This audio segment will appear on Friday’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”
“The Pinocchio Project: Watching as the Supreme Court turns a corporation into a real live boy.” Dahlia Lithwick has this Supreme Court dispatch online at Slate.
“Calif. high court strikes down medical pot limits”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A unanimous California Supreme Court has struck down a law that sought to impose limits on the amount of marijuana a medical patient can legally possess.”
You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of California at this link.
“What Will Citizens United Do to the 2010 Election Cycle?” Ashby Jones has this post at WSJ.com’s “Law Blog.”
And the “Room for Debate” blog of The New York Times is examining “How Corporate Money Will Reshape Politics.”
“Obama Resubmits Three DOJ Nominees to U.S. Senate”: Mike Scarcella has this post today at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”
“Obama blasts Court decision on campaign finance”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.
“House panel recommends impeaching Louisiana judge”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A House task force has recommended that Congress impeach a federal judge from Louisiana for misconduct that lawmakers say goes back decades. The panel voted unanimously Thursday to proceed with four articles of impeachment against U.S. District Judge Thomas Porteous.”
And yesterday evening, Bruce Alpert of The Times-Picayune of New Orleans had a report headlined “Judge Thomas Porteous impeachment case on agenda for a preliminary vote.”
In coverage of today’s Citizens United ruling from Jan Crawford of CBS News at her “Crossroads” blog: Jan has posts titled “Supreme Court Ruling Will Cause Major Upheaval in Campaigns” and “Justice Stevens Stumbles.”
“Supreme Court rejects limits on corporate spending in electoral campaigns”: Robert Barnes and Dan Eggen of The Washington Post have this news update.
Joan Biskupic and Fredreka Schouten of USA Today have a news update headlined “Supreme Court rolls back campaign spending limits.”
The Washington Times has a news update headlined “Divided court strikes down campaign money restrictions.”
Today on the west coast broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition,” Nina Totenberg had an audio segment entitled “Supreme Court Rejects Campaign Spending Limits.”
Online at Slate, law professor Richard L. Hasen has a jurisprudence essay entitled “Money Grubbers: The Supreme Court kills campaign-finance reform.”
Moreover, at his “Election Law Blog,” Hasen has a post titled “Got You to Say ‘Bush v. Gore’!”
And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “A few open, or not so open, questions: The next campaign finance lawsuit?”
“Supreme Court Strikes Down Bans on Corporate Spending in Elections”: Tony Mauro has this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”
“Supreme Court overturns ban on direct corporate spending on elections; In a 5-4 decision that strikes down a 1907 law, the justices say the 1st Amendment gives corporations, just like individuals, a right to spend their own money on political ads for federal candidates”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.
And Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal has a news update headlined “Supreme Court Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns.”
“Justices Block Key Part of Campaign Law”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this news update.
And Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers reports that “Supreme Court ends limits on corporate campaign spending.”
“Court decision opens new avenues for corporate political spending”: Politico.com has this report.
Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Corporate Campaign Spending Backed by U.S. High Court.”
James Vicini of Reuters reports that “Supreme Court rejects corporate campaign spending limits.”
And Bill Mears of CNN.com reports that “Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending.”
The U.S. Supreme Court has announced its ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Comm’n, No. 08-205: Justice Anthony M. Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court, in which the Chief Justice and Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel A. Alito, Jr. joined in full. Justice Clarence Thomas joined all of the opinion of the Court except for part IV. Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor joined only part IV of the opinion of the Court.
In addition to the opinion of the Court, four other Justices wrote separately. The Chief Justice filed a concurring opinion, in which Justice Alito joined. Justice Scalia filed a concurring opinion, in which Justice Alito joined in full and Justice Thomas joined in part. Justice Stevens filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, in which Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor joined. And Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.
You can access the 183-page ruling at this link. This is the only decision that the Court is announcing today.
In early news coverage, Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “Court rolls back campaign spending limits.”
Some resources pertaining to the U.S. Supreme Court‘s anticipated ruling, moments from now, in Citizens United v. Federal Election Comm’n, No. 08-205: At 10 a.m. eastern time today, the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to issue its long-awaited ruling in the Citizens United campaign finance case.
The case was first argued to the Supreme Court on March 24, 2009. You can access the transcript of that oral argument at this link. I collected news coverage of that oral argument in posts you can access here and here.
The Court then took the unusual step of listing the case for reargument and setting the reargument for September 9, 2009. You can access the transcript of the reargument at this link. I collected news coverage of the reargument in a post you can access here.
“Macon native Martin will be new 11th Circuit judge”: This article appears today in The Macon Telegraph.
“In a first test for court watchers, Sotomayor upholds death sentence”: Robert Barnes has this article today in The Washington Post.
“Judge Rules in Favor of Plaintiffs’ Experts in Hormone Replacement Therapy Cases; The experts are slated to testify in trials starting today and Monday”: Amaris Elliott-Engel has this article today in The Legal Intelligencer.
