Home
Politics
The Federal Elections Commission (FEC) ruled the producers had to conform to existing US laws on campaign financing which require political adverts to reveal the source of their funding.
The FEC said the 90-minute documentary, paid for by private individuals, carried an implict message to vote against Clinton in the Democratic primaries, even if it did not say so outright.
Campaign finance laws were brought in to stop businesses, interest groups, political parties and unions from using their financial sway to swamp public airwaves with partisan messages.
Citizens United took the case to a federal court arguing they had the right to make such a movie under the first amendment to the US Constitution which guarantees freedom of expression.
The federal court ruled in the FEC's favor. But the nine Supreme Court justices Tuesday appeared to be leaning towards limiting the state's power to regulate such kinds of publicity.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The FEC said the 90-minute documentary, paid for by private individuals, carried an implict message to vote against Clinton in the Democratic primaries, even if it did not say so outright.
Campaign finance laws were brought in to stop businesses, interest groups, political parties and unions from using their financial sway to swamp public airwaves with partisan messages.
Citizens United took the case to a federal court arguing they had the right to make such a movie under the first amendment to the US Constitution which guarantees freedom of expression.
The federal court ruled in the FEC's favor. But the nine Supreme Court justices Tuesday appeared to be leaning towards limiting the state's power to regulate such kinds of publicity.
----------------------------------------------------------------
