This is one that should inspire some debate - it is what we are here for, amirite?
The group which has filed suit in this instance is basically claiming that political lies are "protected speech"Supreme Court to hear election case
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a Cincinnati case that could decide whether it is constitutional for Ohio election law to prohibit false statements made with malice during an election campaign.
Although the justices have yet to schedule oral arguments on the Ohio law, by accepting the case Friday they rejected arguments by Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine that there was no reason for the high court to review two lower federal courts which had dismissed the lawsuit.
“I think this is further evidence that the court sees serious problems with state laws that regulate electoral speech,’’ said Paul Sherman, an attorney for the Virginia-based Institute for Justice, which urged the justices to hear the case. “They have recently shown a lot of hostility to these kinds of laws and with very good reason.’’
more from Reuters on the case
(Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear an appeal by two conservative groups that assert that an Ohio law that imposes penalties for making knowingly false statements about political candidates violates their right to free speech.
The groups, Susan B. Anthony List and the Coalition Opposed to Additional Spending and Taxes, say that the possibility that the Ohio statute would be enforced against them deterred them from issuing statements during the 2010 election campaign criticizing a Democratic congressman for supporting President Barack Obama's healthcare law.