Receive The Latest Updates

Featured Content

Did a D.C. Federal Court Fail the “Major Purpose Test”?

Did a D.C. Federal Court Fail the “Major Purpose Test”?

A recent opinion by Judge Christopher R. Cooper of the federal District Court in Washington, D.C. poses new risks for advocacy groups and their supporters. The ruling erodes a constitutional limitation on the power of the government to compel Americans speaking about policy issues to register themselves as political committees (PACs) with the Federal Election Commission (FEC).

Read More

First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti: Protecting the Right to Hear Others

First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti: Protecting the Right to Hear Others

Can the government silence speech about an election simply because the speaker is a corporation? Can it deny voters the opportunity to hear a corporation’s views on issues? Forty years ago, the Supreme Court answered no in First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti.

Read More

SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission: Protecting the First Amendment Rights of Americans

SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission: Protecting the First Amendment Rights of Americans

If one person can speak about a candidate without limit, can Congress ban two, three, or hundreds of people from joining together to do the same? That was the simple question presented in the case SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission. Fortunately, a unanimous 2010 D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decision said no, such a limit would violate the First Amendment. Americans can now form independent expenditure groups to raise and spend money on campaign speech without limits. Learn more about this important case.

Read More

SCOTUS Brief in Brief: Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky

SCOTUS Brief in Brief: Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky

On February 28, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in the case of Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky. In 2010, Minnesota prohibited a voter from wearing a T-shirt that depicted the Gadsden flag while voting, restricting his First Amendment right to express his political beliefs. Can Minnesota enforce a voter dress code? Or will the Supreme Court right this wrong? Here’s everything you need to know about the case.

Read More

Understanding Super PACs

Understanding Super PACs

You’ve probably heard the term tossed around over the past couple of years, but what exactly is a “super PAC”? These organizations have been given a bad name by their competitors – powerful politicians and media corporations – who previously held a monopoly on political speech. However, the reality is much different than what opponents of free speech would have you believe. Check out the Institute’s newest infographic to understand what super PACs are really about.

Read More

Latest Updates

Evansville Courier & Press: Indiana among top states for political speech rights (In the News)

Comments to FEC on Notice 2018-05 (Rulemaking Petition Concerning Former Candidates’ Personal Use)

Dark Money: The Courts Awaken

The Hill: Remembering a major victory for free speech, 40 years later (In the News)

Washington Examiner: Maryland lawmakers voted to criminalize online speech in the name of security (In the News)

Forbes: Why Are We Still Arguing Over The Facts Of The IRS Scandal? (In the News)

Americans Support Speech Regulation… If They Are Not Told the Facts Surrounding It

TaxProf Blog: The IRS Scandal, Day 1829: Wyland Says Johnston’s Op-Ed Contains ‘A Number Of Breathtaking Distortions And Omissions’ (In the News)

Wiley Rein Election Law News: New Study Ranks States’ Campaign Contribution Laws (In the News)

No, OpenSecrets, Nonprofits Are Not “Fueling” an Increase in Political Ads

American Thinker: Is Your State Restricting Your Ability to Support Candidates? (In the News)

Daily Caller: Clinton Campaign Funneled $150,000 To Hillary Clinton’s Personal Company (In the News)

Center for Public Integrity: Politicos beware: Court ruling could prompt more transparent campaign spending (In the News)

TaxProf Blog: The IRS Scandal, Day 1828: Smith Responds To Johnston’s ‘Ad Hominem Attack’ On His WSJ Op-Ed (In the News)

Did a D.C. Federal Court Fail the “Major Purpose Test”?

Reason: From Washington to Wisconsin, States Are Punishing Dissent (In the News)

Making a Difference with Anonymous Political Speech

Wall Street Journal: The Unresolved IRS Scandal (In the News)

Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star: Virginia ranked A+ for political free speech rights (In the News)

Center for Public Integrity: Study: Most Americans want to kill ‘Citizens United’ with constitutional amendment (In the News)

Latest Tweets

Find Recent Political Speech Developments

The Center for Competitive Politics is now the Institute for Free Speech.