High Court to hear appeal over anti-Clinton movie
By MARK SHERMAN
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court will hear an appeal from a conservative group that wanted to promote and air its anti-Hillary Clinton movie without complying with a landmark campaign finance law.
The justices, in an order Friday, said they will review a lower court ruling that Citizens United's "Hillary: The Movie" was clearly intended to influence people to vote against Clinton in her run for the presidency.
A three-judge court in Washington unanimously said the group, which is partly funded by corporations, had to attach a disclaimer and disclose its donors in order to run ads promoting the movie.
James Bopp, Jr., the group's lawyer, has devised repeated legal challenges to the 2003 campaign finance law that sets limits on corporate- and union-funded political ads that run close to elections and identify candidates.
Although the Supreme Court invalidated those restrictions for ads that are not express advocacy, the judges who ruled in this case said the movie could be seen as nothing but anti-Clinton and intended to influence voters.
It was produced solely "to inform the electorate that Sen. Clinton is unfit for office, that the United States would be a dangerous place in a President Hillary Clinton world, and that viewers should vote against her," the judges said in a unanimous ruling.
So how is it that Fahrenheit 911 and W, which were financed by corporations (y'know, movie studios), weren't subject to this ruling?