GOF and 11 other nonprofit organizations called on the U.S. Supreme Court to affirm a federal district court ruling that the electioneering communications provisions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) are unconstitutional as applied. Electioneering communications prevent organizations like GOA from even mentioning the name of Congressmen in targeted broadcast issue advertisements. The case, Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life (No. 06-969), is the first as-applied challenge to BCRA to be argued before the Supreme Court. Importantly, the coalition also asked the Supreme Court to revisit its prior holdings in Buckley v. Valeo and McConnell v. FEC based on their overlooking of the people's Freedom of the Press.
Docket
A pro-life Wisconsin based nonprofit called Wisconsin Right to Life (WRTL) wanted to produce political ads during the 2004 election, but the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA) prohibits corporate funds from being used for certain political advertisements in the 60-day period prior to an election. As this case worked its way up the system before coming to SCOTUS, WRTL made the argument that they did not explicitly endorse or oppose a candidate during the restrains defined by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act. GOA, GOF, and nine other organizations filed an amicus brief with WRTL because the ability to express free speech through advertisements on political issues affects Second Amendment advocacy.
