Look at these two events. 2002 - Congress passes the McCain-Feingold Act. This law includes limits on the use of "issue ads” by interest groups during a campaign. 2007 - The Supreme Court declares that limiting the use of issue ads” during a campaign is unconstitutional.
Which of these arguments would a supporter of the Supreme Court's 2007 decision make?
а
b

The McCain-Feingold Act violates freedom of speech.
The Supreme Court has judicial authority over the President.
Election advertising is regulated by the Electoral College.
A lobbyist's rights are protected by the 14th Amendment.
с
d

a. The McCain-Feingold Act violates freedom of speech.

Explanation:

Issue ads refer to a scenario where a candidate is named or discussed in relation to an issue without however, supporting or decampaigning an opponent.

This was restricted after the McCain-Feingold act of 2002. The Act restricted the use of Issue Ads within 30 days of a primary election or 60 days of a general election for a person running for any Federal Office if the broadcast cost more than $10,000.

The Supreme Court ruled in its decision that unless the ad was expressly supporting or decampaigning a candidate, it should be exempted from the Act. The decision of the Court was also noteworthy as the Court declared it was against greater regulation of political speech.

A supporter of this Act would therefore probably seize upon this last part and say that the Act violates freedom of speech.

answer; nearly half;