Roosting chickens?

The US Supreme Court used technical reasons to avoid ruling on a case concerning a right wing group’s would-be “Swift Boat” propaganda smear campaign. Instead, the Court kicked the case back to lower courts.

At issue in this case was an anti-Hillary Clinton film produced by the right wing group (the group is also working on a propaganda film on Obama). The group wanted to advertise its film on television in order to influence the elections. However, they felt they should be immune from campaign finance laws, arguing that their film was similar to a real documentary.

The District Court rejected that argument, and ruled that the right wing group was bound by campaign finance laws, meaning they’d have to clearly indicate who was promoting the ad and all donors would have to be publicly identified. Given the group’s stated goal of influencing the election, this was clearly the correct decision.

By returning the case to the District Court, the Supreme Court correctly decided that the right wing group’s case should not have a fast remedy. That doesn’t necessarily meant that the case won’t end up before the Supreme Court later, after all appeals have been exhausted.

The law the right wing group wants to avoid obeying is the McCain-Feingold law from 2002. Should the group ultimately prevail, John McCain would ultimately benefit, which would be ironic. However, we’ll see if McCain’s self-interest trumps principle. If principle matters, McCain will surely disavow all “swift boat” style smear campaigns. Otherwise, he really is just like all the other politicians for whom power matters more than anything.

Tip of the hat to blogging buddy (and fellow American expat) Dawn who pointed this story out to me. Actually, Dawn also recently had some very nice things to say about this blog. Thanks!