Supreme Court considering Ohio ban on campaign lies

What would politics be if politicians were required to be honest?
By Aileen Graef Follow @AileenGraef Contact the Author   |   April 16, 2014 at 5:21 PM

WASHINGTON, April 16 (UPI) -- The Supreme Court is set next week to consider a challenge to a ban in Ohio on false statements during political campaigns.

Those challenging the ban say it is an infringement of the First Amendment right to free speech. The Justices aren't expected to rule on the constitutionality of the ban but rather if it can be challenged before it is actually enforced.

The ban was started when Rep. Steven Driehaus, D-Ohio, complained that the Susan B. Anthony List, a pro-life group, planned attack ads saying that since Driehaus supported the Affordable Care Act, he therefore supported federally-funded abortions.

Driehaus asked Ohio Elections Commission to block the ads saying they were false and citing the ban. The billboard owner decided not to run the ad for fear of legal action, but Driehaus lost the election anyway and withdrew the complaint before a decision was made.

The Susan B. Anthony List then challenged the law, arguing the ban is unconstitutional.

Critics across the political spectrum seem to agree it would be difficult to define campaign lies and could be a costly venture to monitor.

[HuffPost Live]

Like Us on Facebook for more stories from UPI.com  
Related UPI Stories
Latest Headlines
Top Stories
Kim Jong Un had terrapin farm manager executed, says source
More than 80 percent of North Korean defectors are women, says report
North Korea requests medical aid from U.N. agencies
Kenyan bishop warns Obama against pro-gay policy
Duma approves construction of $4 billion bridge to Crimea