“Is Money Speech?”

by Walter Olson on September 12, 2013


Eugene Volokh in a Federalist Society video on campaign regulation and the First Amendment. A dissent: Scott Greenfield.

P.S. Beware of setting up a state-level group to promote controversial views on issues, even if promoting candidates is not your primary purpose [Adler on cert petition in Corsi v. Ohio Elections Commission]

{ 3 comments }

1 Hugo S. Cunningham 09.12.13 at 10:11 am

Money is not speech, but it is a crucial component of the mass dissemination of speech. In the late 1780s, the term of art for mass dissemination of speech was “the press.”

2 shg 09.12.13 at 10:41 am

Not a dissent, really, but more an agnostic disinclined to let facile explanations go without some scrutiny. I see merit (and problems) with both sides of the issue.

3 Paul Westlake 09.29.13 at 2:39 am

Hugo, no, it wasn’t. Freedom of the press prevents the government from prohibiting the application of the truth as a defense in cases of libel against the government or its agencies and officers. This was known as “seditious libel” in British Common Law. The “press” is not merely printing, otherwise every piece of literature ever printed would be covered by freedom of the press. Truth is protected by freedom of the press. Everything else is protected by freedom of speech.

Comments on this entry are closed.