Before the Supreme Court decided the McConnell case, I questioned here the constitutionality of BCRA’s section 311, the “stand by your ad” provision that requires a candidate to say on camera on a broadcast ad that he or she authorized the ad. In particular I questioned whether this provision by compelling speech by the candidate (as opposed to merely requiring disclosure of authorization or funding) was constitutional under the First Amendment, particularly because the purpose of the provision appeared to be to limit the amount of negative advertising, which I take to be an unconstitutional purpose.
In the McConnell case, the Court summarily upheld section 311 against constitutional challenge (it was part of Chief Justice Rehnquist’s holding for the Court). Here is the entire analysis:
- FECA