Judge: State can't censor political-campaign speech

Ohio District Judge Timothy Black on Thursday ruled that the state cannot issue judgments on what is true or false in political campaigns, handing a free speech victory to the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List organization, which had fought for the decision for four years.

Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the SBA List, said the decision "allows us to freely communicate the truth with voters – that elected representatives who voted for the Affordable Care Act voted for taxpayer-funded abortion."

"It is beyond dispute that, because Congress and the White House failed to include the Stupak amendment, Obamacare contains multiple abortion-funding provisions," she said. "This reality will continue to be a key part of our message to voters in the 2014 midterm elections and beyond."

The organization had taken the issue to court when it wanted to put up billboards in 2010 exposing that former Rep. Steve Driehaus, an Ohio Democrat, supported taxpayer-funded abortion by voting for Obamacare.

TRENDING: The coup is failing

The billboards, however, were banned under the state's "false claims" law that set up the government as judge and jury over whether any political statement was true or false.

The case already had been to the U.S. Supreme Court once, after an appellate court said the SBA List didn't have standing to sue over the law, but the Supreme Court overturned the ruling.

"This summer, more than 20 groups from across the political spectrum submitted amicus briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of SBA List. The ACLU, the Cato Institute, and even President Obama's own solicitor general supported our fight for the right to criticize elected officials," Dannenfelser noted.

Black's ruling struck down as unconstitutional Ohio's "false statement" law, which previously allowed a politically appointed government panel to decide whether a political campaign statement was true or false.

"After four years and a trip to the U.S. Supreme Court, today we finally have a victory for free speech," Dannenfelser said.

Black had quoted from the SBA's arguments: "[We are not] arguing for a right to lie. We're arguing that we have a right not to have the truth of our political statements be judged by the government."

WND reported the case originated in 2010 when SBA List tried to put up billboards to educate the constituents of Driehaus about his vote in support of taxpayer-funded abortion under Obamacare.

Driehaus was one of the key votes for the controversial health insurance law. He had been holding out because he didn't want to support abortion funding but eventually was convinced to support the bill.

He said he didn't believe Obamacare allowed funding for abortion, although there are several ways in which such funding now is evident.

SBA List wanted to publicize his support for abortion funding but was stopped by the Ohio law. SBA List was also threatened with prosecution if it engaged in similar speech about Driehaus or other candidates in Ohio.

Dannenfelser noted Driehaus initially opposed Obamacare because he said it did not contain specific language preventing the funding of abortion.

"That never changed and to this very day, Americans are still fighting the expansion of taxpayer funding of abortion brought about by the overhaul," Dannenfelser said.

However, Ohio bureaucrats, citing a law that "criminalizes 'false' political speech" and leaves it to bureaucrats to judge, ordered that the billboards could not go up.

Get "Taking America Back," Joseph Farah's manifesto for sovereignty, self-reliance and moral renewal

Earlier, SBA List won its other battle with Driehaus. He had filed a defamation lawsuit alleging SBA List cost him his job and a "loss of livelihood," but a district court held that SBA List's statements about Driehaus' vote on Obamacare were not defamatory.

Support for SBA List's position came from a wide range of interests, including the ACLU, which said: "The people have an absolute right to criticize their public officials, the government should not be the arbiter of true or false speech and, in any event, the best answer for bad speech is more speech."

Since its adoption by only Democrats in Congress, there have been half a dozen bills introduced to address various issues concerning the funding of abortion under Obamacare.

The SBA List cited research both from the Charlotte Lozier Institute (CLI) and the Kaiser Family Foundation that found that millions of women will gain elective abortion coverage under Obamacare through the affordability subsidies and the Medicaid expansion.

"CLI estimates that up to 111,500 additional abortions per year will be heavily subsidized by taxpayers," SBA List explained.

WND later reported that SBA List, rather than being intimidated by the speech challenge case, already has taken its billboard campaigns to voters in at least three more largely conservative-leaning states.

The message is that the senators, Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Mark Pryor of Arkansas, supported funding abortions through their Obamacare votes.

The Democrat lawmakers are facing high hurdles in their re-election campaigns in states where abortion funding is a concern of voters. Already, in this election year, Democrats are hindered by a stagnant economy, massive new taxes, a failed foreign policy and scandals linked to the White House that could cost them control of the Senate.

SBA List said it is highlighting through the billboards the Democrats' support of "taxpayer funded abortion by voting for the Affordable Care Act."