Content-Based Restriction
The Court found the government-debt exception to be an impermissible content-based restriction on speech subject to strict scrutiny.
Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants, Inc.
- Jurisdiction: United States (July 6, 2020)
- Victims<![CDATA[无]]>Defendants<![CDATA[William P. Barr]]><![CDATA[Federal Communications Commission]]>Plaintiffs<![CDATA[American Association of Political Consultants]]><![CDATA[Democratic Party of Oregon]]><![CDATA[Public Policy Polling]]><![CDATA[Washington State Democratic Central Committee]]><![CDATA[Tea Party Forward PAC]]>Investigators<![CDATA[无]]>Prosecutors<![CDATA[无]]>Defense Attorneys<![CDATA[Noel J. Francisco]]>Plaintiff Attorneys<![CDATA[Roman Martinez]]>Judges<![CDATA[Brett Kavanaugh]]><![CDATA[John Roberts]]><![CDATA[Samuel Alito]]><![CDATA[Clarence Thomas]]><![CDATA[Sonia Sotomayor]]><![CDATA[Stephen Breyer]]><![CDATA[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]]><![CDATA[Elena Kagan]]><![CDATA[Neil Gorsuch]]>Institutions<![CDATA[Supreme Court of the United States]]><![CDATA[Federal Communications Commission]]><![CDATA[U.S. Department of Justice]]><![CDATA[U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit]]>
- Case Tags: Robocall Ban;First Amendment;TCPA;Content-Based Restriction