RECENT  POSTS:  » Video: To Focus on the Family's Citizenlink, a simple business request = 'home invasion' » Audio: Former senior NOM official says we'll have 50 state equality by 2015 » Video: Florida AG Pam Bondi advocates for delayed (and denied, if she had her way) justice » Audio: Michelle Duggar robocalls against LGBT nondiscrimination ordinance in Fayetteville, AK » AFA commentator equates homosexuality with blindness, paralysis » AFA's senior issues analyst (again) equates homosexuality with necrophilia, bestiality, incest, pedophilia » 'The nation's attic' to get some rainbow-hued light » Marriage equality's main legal opponents now outsourcing fearful visions to Hollowood » GLAAD: BarbWire.com: Making the anti-LGBT movement look more extreme by the day » Right on equal rights, from the right  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

08/19/2010

Mixed District Court ruling for NOM; or as they'll surely call it: partly activist, partly okay

by Jeremy Hooper

Not sure what to make of this mixed-bag decision, really:


PORTLAND — A U.S. District Court judge has delivered a split ruling that backs disclosing the names of out-of-state donors who helped repeal a gay marriage law in Maine.

Saying a state law requiring that the names of donors be disclosed within a certain time frame is “unconstitutionally vague,” U.S. District Judge D. Brock Hornby nevertheless said the request by the state Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices that the National Organization for Marriage disclose names of donors who gave money to defeat a gay marriage law in Maine is not a burden on NOM’s freedom of speech.

But Hornby took shots at some of Maine’s campaign finance disclosure rules. The judge said rules requiring 24-hour disclosure of independent expenditures over $250 — not just before an election, but whenever they occur — “has not been justified ... is impermissably burdensome and cannot be enforced.”
Judge: Names of gay-marriage foes must be disclosed [Portland Press Herald]

So it seems good, but with some caveats. Still chewing on it; see below and form your own thoughts.

**The full opinion:


Dbh 08192010 1-09cv538 Natl Org for Marriage v Mckee

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails