As reported here, "[t]he state Supreme Court was urged Thursday to overturn a ruling that forced two radio talk show hosts to report the value of airtime they devoted to a gas-tax rollback initiative they launched last year."
"Critics, including the libertarian public interest law firm Institute for Justice, called last summer's ruling by Thurston County Superior Court a stunning blow against free speech and an unfettered press. But lawyers for San Juan County, Seattle, Kent and Auburn, who pressed the original complaint, said the disclosure was essential information for voters." I was, and still am, among those critics, and posted about this here, here and here.
My question to the lawyers is, how can this stifling of free speech be good for the voters? It isn't. "William Maurer, representing the Institute for Justice, said the reporting requirement gives government power to regulate free speech by squelching campaign debate that regulators don't like.
"It would give the government power to decide who gets to speak on the radio and to decide what may be said," he said." Just as happens in China, Iran, and other dictatorships.
Exactly when the WSSC will hear this case is up in the air, but it may be later this year, which would be good. On the other hand, the WSSC is notoriously liberal in its outlook, so what they may decide remains to be seen. Hopefully reason will prevail, otherwise this may end up before the Supreme Court of the US.
No comments:
Post a Comment