Tech24 Deals Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the Tech24 Deals Content Network
  2. Citizens United v. FEC - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

    McConnell v. FEC (2003) (in part) Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The court held 5–4 that the freedom of speech clause of the First Amendment ...

  3. United States free speech exceptions - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech...

    United States free speech exceptions. The Bill of Rights in the National Archives. In the United States, some categories of speech are not protected by the First Amendment. According to the Supreme Court of the United States, the U.S. Constitution protects free speech while allowing limitations on certain categories of speech. [ 1]

  4. McCutcheon v. FEC - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCutcheon_v._FEC

    McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, 572 U.S. 185 (2014), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court on campaign finance.The decision held that Section 441 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, which imposed a limit on contributions an individual can make over a two-year period to all national party and federal candidate committees, is unconstitutional.

  5. Buckley v. Valeo - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckley_v._Valeo

    Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court on campaign finance. A majority of justices held that, as provided by section 608 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, limits on election expenditures are unconstitutional. In a per curiam (by the Court) opinion, they ruled that expenditure limits ...

  6. Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment...

    [17] [39] Analysts believed that because the Court agreed to hear this case, there were unanswered questions between the protection of free speech from the First Amendment, and the legal enforcement of protecting minors from unprotected free speech such as through restrictions on the sales of pornography to minors.

  7. Snyder v. Phelps - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snyder_v._Phelps

    U.S. Const. amend. Snyder v. Phelps, 562 U.S. 443 (2011), is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that speech made in a public place on a matter of public concern cannot be the basis of liability for a tort of emotional distress, even if the speech is viewed as offensive or outrageous.

  8. Freedom of speech in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the...

    The First Amendment's freedom of speech right not only proscribes most government restrictions on the content of speech and ability to speak, but also protects the right to receive information, [9] prohibits most government restrictions or burdens that discriminate between speakers, [10] restricts the tort liability of individuals for certain ...

  9. Campaign finance reform amendment - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_finance_reform...

    A campaign finance reform amendment refers to any proposed amendment to the United States Constitution to authorize greater restrictions on spending related to political speech, and to overturn Supreme Court rulings which have narrowed such laws under the First Amendment. Several amendments have been filed since Citizens United v.