Mc Connell v. Federal Election Commission
GPTKB entity
Statements (57)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instance_of |
gptkb:legal_case
|
| gptkbp:case_types |
gptkb:legal_case
First Amendment rights vs. government regulation Supporters argue it prevents corruption |
| gptkbp:championship |
5-4
|
| gptkbp:consequences |
Legal impact on campaign finance reform efforts
|
| gptkbp:decided_by |
gptkb:legal_case
December 10, 2003 |
| gptkbp:docket_number |
02-1674
|
| gptkbp:historical_context |
Post-Watergate campaign finance reforms
|
| gptkbp:historical_debate |
September 8, 2003
Political debate over campaign finance regulation |
| gptkbp:historical_impact |
Influenced political campaign strategies
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
Mc Connell v. Federal Election Commission
|
| gptkbp:impact |
Influenced campaign finance laws
|
| gptkbp:is_cited_in |
540 U. S. 93 (2003)
|
| gptkbp:is_involved_in |
gptkb:Federal_Election_Commission
gptkb:James_B._Mc_Connell |
| gptkbp:judicial_review |
Constitutionality of campaign finance laws
Outcome of judicial review on campaign finance laws Judicial review of campaign finance regulations |
| gptkbp:legacy |
Significant in the evolution of campaign finance law
|
| gptkbp:legal_issue |
Campaign finance regulation
Government interest in preventing corruption Arguments centered on First Amendment rights Free speech vs. campaign finance reform Influenced public policy on campaign finance Part of the legal framework governing elections Judicial outcome affected political funding practices |
| gptkbp:legal_representation |
Analysis of campaign finance laws' constitutionality
|
| gptkbp:legislation |
gptkb:Federal_Election_Campaign_Act
|
| gptkbp:material |
Challenge to BCRA by political parties
|
| gptkbp:notable_event |
gptkb:Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission
gptkb:Bipartisan_Campaign_Reform_Act_of_2002 |
| gptkbp:outcome |
Affirmed lower court ruling
Upheld the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act Set a precedent for future campaign finance cases Balancing free speech and anti-corruption interests Affected future campaign finance legislation BCRA's ban on soft money contributions upheld Critics argue it limits free speech Impact on political campaign funding Landmark case in campaign finance history Regulation of soft money contributions Relevant in discussions of electoral integrity Upheld restrictions on political advertising |
| gptkbp:precedent |
Regulation of political advertising
Influenced subsequent Supreme Court rulings Set judicial precedent for future cases |
| gptkbp:public_perception |
gptkb:Justice_Antonin_Scalia
gptkb:Justice_John_Paul_Stevens Mixed reactions from political groups Concern over free speech implications Affirmed the constitutionality of BCRA's restrictions |
| gptkbp:significance |
First major Supreme Court case on campaign finance after the enactment of BCRA
|
| gptkbp:bfsParent |
gptkb:Citizens_United_ruling
|
| gptkbp:bfsLayer |
6
|