31 Cited authorities

  1. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan

    376 U.S. 254 (1964)   Cited 6,358 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a public official or public figure can recover damages for defamation on a matter of public concern only if he proves that the speaker acted with actual malice
  2. R.A.V. v. St. Paul

    505 U.S. 377 (1992)   Cited 1,398 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds a law criminalizing conduct such as placing a burning cross or Nazi swastika, which one knows to arouse anger, alarm, or resentment on the basis of race, religion, etc.
  3. Professional Real Estate Investors, Inc. v. Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc.

    508 U.S. 49 (1993)   Cited 994 times   39 Legal Analyses
    Holding litigants immune from an antitrust claim under Noerr-Pennington immunity
  4. Babbitt v. Farm Workers

    442 U.S. 289 (1979)   Cited 1,515 times
    Holding that plaintiffs had standing to challenge law prohibiting use of "dishonest, untruthful and deceptive publicity" in consumer publicity campaigns despite absence of an intent on behalf of plaintiffs to "propagate untruths" where plaintiffs engaged in publicity campaigns in the past and stated intent to do so in the future and where "erroneous statement is inevitable in free debate"
  5. Mcconnell v. F.E.C.

    540 U.S. 93 (2003)   Cited 557 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding BCRA survived exacting scrutiny, given the “important state interests” in “providing the electorate with information, deterring actual corruption and avoiding any appearance thereof, and gathering the data necessary to enforce more substantive electioneering restrictions”
  6. California Transport v. Trucking Unlimited

    404 U.S. 508 (1972)   Cited 1,469 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the right to petition extends to all departments of the Government," including the courts
  7. N.A.A.C.P. v. Button

    371 U.S. 415 (1963)   Cited 2,090 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a Virginia solicitation law, which prohibited organizations like the N.A.A.C.P. from finding or retaining lawyers for individual litigants and paying those attorneys a per diem fee for their professional services, violated the First Amendment because the state had not advanced any substantial regulatory interest to justify the prohibition
  8. Bill Johnson's Restaurants, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    461 U.S. 731 (1983)   Cited 850 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the NLRB could not bar an employer from pursuing a well-grounded lawsuit for damages under state law
  9. Mine Workers v. Pennington

    381 U.S. 657 (1965)   Cited 1,516 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that immunity extends to petitioning conduct “either standing alone or as part of a broader scheme”
  10. Eastern R. Conf. v. Noerr Motors

    365 U.S. 127 (1961)   Cited 1,750 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that antitrust laws do not apply to businesses combining to lobby the government, even where such conduct has an anticompetitive purpose and an anticompetitive effect, because the alternative "would raise important constitutional questions" under the First Amendment
  11. Section 434 - Transferred

    2 U.S.C. § 434   Cited 184 times
    Requiring disclosure of "contributions ... expressly advocating the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate"
  12. Section 104.20 - Reporting electioneering communications (52 U.S.C. 30104 (f))

    11 C.F.R. § 104.20   Cited 15 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Requiring disclosure of qualifying donors only if the donation "was made for the purpose of furthering electioneering communications"
  13. Section 114.10 - Corporations and labor organizations making independent expenditures and electioneering communications

    11 C.F.R. § 114.10   Cited 15 times

    (a)General. Corporations and labor organizations may make independent expenditures, as defined in 11 CFR 100.16 , and electioneering communications, as defined in 11 CFR 100.29 . Corporations and labor organizations are prohibited from making coordinated expenditures as defined in 11 CFR 109.20 , coordinated communications as defined in 11 CFR 109.21 , or contributions as defined in 11 CFR part 100, subpart B. NOTE TO PARAGRAPH (a): Pursuant to SpeechNow.org v. FEC, 599 F.3d 686 (D.C. Cir. 2010)

  14. Section 109.20 - What does ''coordinated'' mean?

    11 C.F.R. § 109.20   Cited 3 times
    Defining "coordinated" similarly
  15. Section 100.134 - Internal communications by corporations, labor organizations, and membership organizations

    11 C.F.R. § 100.134

    (a)General provision. Any cost incurred for any communication by a membership organization, including a labor organization, to its members, or any cost incurred for any communication by a corporation to its stockholders or executive or administrative personnel, is not an expenditure, except that the costs directly attributable to such a communication that expressly advocates the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate (other than a communication primarily devoted to subjects other than