June 29th, 2009
01:00 PM ET
9 years ago

Conservative filmmakers will get another hearing

Monday the Supreme Court deferred a ruling in a case involving a documentary on Hillary Clinton.  The Court will rehear argument in the case in the fall.

Monday the Supreme Court deferred a ruling in a case involving a documentary on Hillary Clinton. The Court will rehear argument in the case in the fall.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday it will reargue an important campaign finance reform case dealing with a scathing documentary about former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

The justices put off an expected ruling in the case, and will rehear the issues on September 9. It is unusual for the high court to return early from its summer recess to hear an appeal. The court normally begins its fall term in early October.

The justices apparently could not reach a conclusion on whether the film was subject to federal oversight regarding when and where it could be shown in an election year.

At issue was whether the 90-minute "Hillary: The Movie" - as well as television ads to promote the film - should have been subject to strict campaign finance laws on political advocacy, or was instead a constitutionally protected form of commercial speech.

It is unclear whether high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor will be confirmed in time to hear the case. If not, just eight justices will hear the appeal.

Filed under: Hillary Clinton • Popular Posts • Supreme Court
soundoff (113 Responses)
  1. Stuffit

    Sniffit June 29th, 2009 12:04 pm ET


    Ding ding ding…we have a winner! Please step away from the keyboard if you don't understand the above.

    If only this passion would be spread across the broad spectrum of issues where these same abuses are occurring could we all step away from our keyboards.

    How many loopholes have been found and exploited by BOTH SIDES? Yet again, an example of poorly written tax code. Or, is it purposely written in a sub-standard manner? The tax code is simply a vehicle for politicians to manipulate certain demographics to parry favor with them and win votes. If it weren't, there wouldn't have been over 16,000 changes to the code since 1986.

    With all of the recent legislation Congress has passed, it has to be a sieve in comparison.

    June 29, 2009 12:50 pm at 12:50 pm |
  2. ThinkAboutIt

    ck: There is no censorship going on by the "liberal left". The issue at hand is whether tax dollars were used to make this movie, thus making it accountable to campaign finance laws.

    June 29, 2009 12:50 pm at 12:50 pm |
  3. slowgun

    @Amazed in M June 29th, 2009 12:34 pm ET

    ….Barney the Dinosaur could run as a democRAT in NY and get elected.


    Funny seeing as how the republicans have had control of the state legislature for the last 40 years!"

    She only used this state as a stepping stone. So unless you are from NY don't dare spout that she was effective."


    I'm from New York...She did a great job as her high marks by a non-partisn watchdog organization shows

    But, Amazed, you can still hate her just because she is a Democrat, if you want too

    June 29, 2009 12:51 pm at 12:51 pm |
  4. Ren from Baltimore

    This case covers whether the "movie" was indeed a lengthy campaign ad. If it was, the money associated with it would be subject to campaign contribution and expenditure laws.

    Besides, both right and left leaners: Freedom of speech allows you to talk trash about my wife, my kids, my friends and neighbors? Since when?? What did you think of those sleazy ads in 2004 attacking John McCain's military record? Were those ads a matter of free speech? Nope.

    June 29, 2009 12:52 pm at 12:52 pm |
  5. Albert

    Commercial Speech cannot get Constitutional Protection, if it was financed by TAX DOLLARS.

    June 29, 2009 12:53 pm at 12:53 pm |
  6. J.Crobuzon

    CK, if the court decides that you can pass off election ads as movies, next election year we'll see NAILIN' PALIN in every theater in this country. "Robin Williams IS Grampa McCain in THE REAL McCAINS." GW BUSH: the Movie. 98% of comedians are foul-mouthed liberals, and the other two guys are Jeff Foxworthy and Larry the Cable whatever; this means conservatives will be at a huge disadvantage.

    dan in tucson, glad you feel that way about my new gay porno movie TUCSON DAN. I think it will be bigger than BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN. We used your name and address, but you can just sue me and my multi-million dollar company if you are offended. Did I mention the Russian Mob owns 20% of my company? Luckily, free speech is probably on your side unless the court decides for those filmmakers.

    June 29, 2009 12:53 pm at 12:53 pm |
  7. Once You Vote Black: PUMA where are you?

    I wonder if we will see an uptic in PUMA activity as a result of this, or is that movement dead?

    June 29, 2009 12:53 pm at 12:53 pm |
  8. illinoistom

    Clearly, this is a violation of the First Amendment. Even the L.A. Times pointed out that they (a corporately owned newspaper) can publish stories critical of candidates up to election day, so a film documentary is entitled to the same protections.

    June 29, 2009 12:55 pm at 12:55 pm |
  9. MatthewDetroit

    Maybe you should be mad at the lying cheat John Edwards who would have syphoned off some of your votes. He is the reason you lost to Barack, not a tape that was made as a commercial exercise about how bad you are.
    Face the facts. Barack wooped you and now he gave you a dead end job where no one sees or hears from you.
    HE is running again in 2012 and Michelle is running in 2016.
    You BLEW it babe.

    June 29, 2009 12:56 pm at 12:56 pm |
  10. AK907

    The most hilarious and interesting aspect of this stroy it that most of the liberals commenting on this story are complaining about misuse of tax dollars. Well what about ACORN, they are being investigated in 14 different states for voter fraud and missallocation of resources, but the Democrats in congress are still channeling tax dollars into their coffers. HYPOCRITES.

    June 29, 2009 12:58 pm at 12:58 pm |
  11. Rick Leonhard

    Interesting not even a mention about the reversal by the Supreme Court of Sotomayor's ruling against the Connecticut firefighers! There's no agenda at CNN.

    June 29, 2009 01:01 pm at 1:01 pm |
  12. Once You Vote Black: PUMA where are you?

    Oh come one AK907 being investigated is not the same as convicted, and make funds available to non profits is not the same as giveing ACORN money. So dry up or speak facts.

    June 29, 2009 01:03 pm at 1:03 pm |
  13. David E.

    I see the liberal's are at the old game of yapping.

    Micheal Moore can make movies that are fiction, Al Gore the same, plus info-tainmnet from the movie 'W'....and these are called the 'truth'.

    Yet any movies that are contrary you see the vile hate spewing left react like tempermental children.

    Only in the USA can actors/actresses talk with their self-imposed importance (Do you see actors in North Korea/ China/ Cuba/ Germany/ Russia etc... talk as if to influence national policy?) Of course not....they are just actors.

    June 29, 2009 01:03 pm at 1:03 pm |
  14. illinoistom

    There are a number of comments saying tax money was used produce the film. I haven't found any evidence of that, what are your sources?

    June 29, 2009 01:04 pm at 1:04 pm |
  15. Elmo

    Will the courts also review Clintons violation of fund raising laws, and the case by Stan Lee against the Clintons?

    June 29, 2009 01:05 pm at 1:05 pm |
  16. Jon

    Hahaha. The second you talk about ACORN, you lose all credibility. Total lies made up by right-wing talking heads. Sorry.

    June 29, 2009 01:05 pm at 1:05 pm |
  17. MatthewDetroit

    The fact that she is blaming her loss to Barack on the conservatives is just plain funny.
    Get a clue lady, that is why you lost. You dont have a clue. You got outplayed and outmaneuvered by Barack. He ran right over you and you still dont understand why.

    June 29, 2009 01:07 pm at 1:07 pm |
  18. Zeb

    MAtthew in Detroit: "...Face the facts. Barack wooped you ..." Not true. Obama stole the party nomination like the pathetic lying politician he is. Can't wait to see the film about him that's sure to come along...Thankfully he'll be one and done. PUMA Hillary 2012!

    June 29, 2009 01:07 pm at 1:07 pm |
  19. WhoCares?

    You can tell who the dittoheads are :

    The ones that didn't read the article to know what the issue is even about.

    They have had Rush, O'Reilly and Hannity doinfgtheir thinking for them for so long they have forgotten.

    June 29, 2009 01:07 pm at 1:07 pm |
  20. stevie


    there are millions of things our tax dollars are wasted on............

    why do we care about a movie if it tells the tuth...............

    the last election was bought anyway

    cant we all just get along

    June 29, 2009 01:07 pm at 1:07 pm |
  21. NY Dem

    I wish these people would leave Hillary and Bill Clinton alone. This behavior is not good for our country. PERIOD!!!

    June 29, 2009 01:08 pm at 1:08 pm |
  22. suz

    Nero, you are so right on target. I would have thought that the American public would see the writing on the wall. We are being decieved on both sides. While we argue and fight about the left and right, they are all taking away our rights, money and freedoms. This is about both parties, money and power. We are nothing more to both parties than money. Welcome to the new world order. Expect to see the American dollar go away in the next two years. Expect to be micro-chiped when that happens. Forget about your rights they no longer exist. Haliburton is still building detention centers for FEMA(?) as we speak. People get a clue!

    June 29, 2009 01:08 pm at 1:08 pm |
  23. rachel

    What a bunch of garbage. I don't want my money used for political ads or movies unless I okay it or donate it. These people are mad.

    June 29, 2009 01:09 pm at 1:09 pm |
  24. Michael Moore

    Apparently one man's lie is another's free speech.

    June 29, 2009 01:09 pm at 1:09 pm |
  25. fastrbud

    Let the stupid neo-conservative have their lies. A movie that tries so hard to smear is subject to law suits from those offended. They are a fringe element that only listens to the talk radio hate-mongers. They believe it's true no matter what the facts indicate. Maybe Gov. Sanford will have some time to help?

    June 29, 2009 01:10 pm at 1:10 pm |
1 2 3 4 5