HomeUploadUpload DirectHotlinkRandomAbouttheme toggle

Is Money Speech? Free Speech Rules (Episode 5)

Views: 294
Can the government restrict people's ability to spend money on speech?

Here are the Four Rules of Free Speech and Money.

----------
Subscribe to our YouTube channel: http://youtube.com/reasontv
Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Reason.Magaz...
Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/reason
Subscribe to our podcast at Apple Podcasts: https://goo.gl/az3a7a

Reason is the planet's leading source of news, politics, and culture from a libertarian perspective. Go to reason.com for a point of view you won't get from legacy media and old left-right opinion magazines.
----------

Rule 1: Generally, your right to speak includes the right to spend money to speak. The government can't limit, for instance, a newspaper's budget, even if it thinks newspapers have too much influence over elections and politicians. The government can't stop the National Rifle Association or the Sierra Club from spending money to praise the candidates they like,and it can't limit what other Americans spend, either.

Sometimes people frame the question as "Is money speech?" But that's not right. Here's an analogy: The Sixth Amendment protects criminal defendants' right to hire a lawyer. Say the government said, "You can hire any lawyer you like, but you can't pay them more than $1000" (It would be unfair, the theory goes, for rich people to hire better lawyers than poor people can.) That restriction would violate the Sixth Amendment—but not because "money is a lawyer." but because the right to a lawyer includes the right to spend money on a lawyer.

The same is true for most other rights. The Supreme Court has held that people have a right to send their children to private school. If the government were to say, "you can't spend more than $1000 per year on private schooling," that would violate the right to educate your children; but again, not because "money is an education," but because the right to educate your children includes the right to spend money on schooling.

Justice Breyer, who's actually open to substantial restrictions on spending money for speech, put this well:

"A decision to contribute money to a campaign is a matter of First Amendment concern—not because money is speech (it is not); but because it enables speech."

So restrictions on pending money to speak, the Supreme Court has held, are restrictions on speech, and are thus generally unconstitutional.

Rule #2: The government can, though, limit direct contributions to candidates, as opposed to just spending money to speak about candidates. In 1976, for instance, the Supreme Court upheld a cap on contributions to federal candidates. The Court has also upheld even lower caps (as low as $250) for state and local candidates.

Part of the reasoning behind that conclusion is that contribution restrictions limit speech less than expenditure restrictions, precisely because restrictions on contributions to candidates still leave people free to say whatever they like independently of the candidate.

Rule #3: The government may also bar nonprofit organizations from spending tax-deductible contributions on political campaigning. The charitable tax deduction is viewed as a sort of a subsidy. Say you're in the 40% tax bracket; if you give $1000 to a charity, you save $400 in taxes. That contribution is thus equivalent to your paying $600 non-tax-exempt to the charity, and the government forking over the $400.

Based on this subsidy theory, the Supreme Court has held that the government may attach conditions to this tax deduction. One such condition is that groups (whether religious or secular) that collect tax-deductible money aren't supposed to use it to endorse or oppose political candidates. If they want to engage in such speech, they can—just with money they get without the tax exemption.

That's why many groups, such as the ACLU, the NRA, the Sierra Club, actually have two related groups—a so-called "501(c)(3)" group that collects tax-deductible donations and can't use them for political campaigning, and a "501(c)(4)" group that collects non-tax-deductible donations that it can use for politics.

Rule #4: The government may completely bar people who aren't citizens or lawful permanent residents from spending money to advocate for or against candidates. Though non-citizens present in the U.S. generally have broad First Amendment rights, a federal court held that these rights can be limited when it comes to spending even small sums of money related to elections. The Supreme Court upheld that decision, though the Justices didn't issue a written opinion.


Written by Eugene Volokh, who is a First Amendment law professor at UCLA.
Produced and edited by Austin Bragg, who is not.
Additional graphics by Joshua Swain.

----------------

Music: "Lobby Time," by Kevin MacLeod (Incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
@ReasonVidsfollow
Thumbnail for Shark Tank's Kevin O'Leary Explains Donald Trump's Success34:49
Shark Tank's Kevin O'Leary Explains Donald Trump's Success
ReasonVids
256 views
Thumbnail for Stossel: 100 years of Communist Disaster5:16
Stossel: 100 years of Communist Disaster
ReasonVids
257 views
Thumbnail for Richard Epstein: Obamacare's Collapse, the 2016 Election, & More1:06:40
Richard Epstein: Obamacare's Collapse, the 2016 Election, & More
ReasonVids
308 views
Thumbnail for What a shitshow1:22
What a shitshow
x0x7
684 views
Thumbnail for Game of Thrones: Libertarian Edition5:59
Game of Thrones: Libertarian Edition
ReasonVids
226 views
Thumbnail for Independents Day is June 28! Pre-Order Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch's libertarian manifesto today!1:26
Independents Day is June 28! Pre-Order Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch's libertarian manifesto today!
ReasonVids
247 views
Thumbnail for Exploitation: It's Okay When We Do It | Ride and Roast27:26
Exploitation: It's Okay When We Do It | Ride and Roast
Terrence Popp
747 views
Thumbnail for The Young Turks Election Meltdown 2016: From smug to utterly devastated.26:01
The Young Turks Election Meltdown 2016: From smug to utterly devastated.
AOU
1059 views
Thumbnail for The double standard of The Young Turds1:36
The double standard of The Young Turds
AOU
427 views
Thumbnail for Brutal Doom Sunlust Map 0113:32
Brutal Doom Sunlust Map 01
brutalist_gaming
611 views
Thumbnail for Gary Johnson: 'I Always Thought Telling the Truth Would Rule the Day. And It Doesn't.'30:58
Gary Johnson: 'I Always Thought Telling the Truth Would Rule the Day. And It Doesn't.'
ReasonVids
247 views
Thumbnail for We Love Strong Women | Grunt Speak Live3:04:25
We Love Strong Women | Grunt Speak Live
Terrence Popp
831 views
Thumbnail for City Zones Popular Mechanic Shop out of Business2:51
City Zones Popular Mechanic Shop out of Business
IJvids
270 views
Thumbnail for Stossel: Baby Salmon Threatened?5:03
Stossel: Baby Salmon Threatened?
ReasonVids
244 views
Thumbnail for Joe Biden: "Buy a Shotgun"1:59
Joe Biden: "Buy a Shotgun"
AOU
5450 views
Thumbnail for Boomer Rumbling 21:24:40
Boomer Rumbling 2
Ivan
1545 views
Thumbnail for Marijuana Policy in the Trump Era53:38
Marijuana Policy in the Trump Era
ReasonVids
242 views
Thumbnail for 1932 Footage of Japan during cherry blossom season [Colorized by AI]7:52
1932 Footage of Japan during cherry blossom season [Colorized by AI]
bestofnab
1863 views
Thumbnail for 3 Reasons Eric Cantor Lost - And Why Republicans Will Continue to Lose2:05
3 Reasons Eric Cantor Lost - And Why Republicans Will Continue to Lose
ReasonVids
206 views
Thumbnail for Protestors Attempt to Shutdown NBA Game Attended by Prince William and Duchess Kate0:50
Protestors Attempt to Shutdown NBA Game Attended by Prince William and Duchess Kate
ReasonVids
212 views
Thumbnail for That's not how video-conferencing is supposed to work.0:29
That's not how video-conferencing is supposed to work.
publicfreakouts
252 views

points

Permalink
Reply
libertarian, reason magazine, reason.com, reason.tv, reasontv
TOS  •  Add Keywords  •  Donate  •   Analytics  •   DMCA  •   Puzzle