MCINTYRE V. OHIO ELECTION COMMISSION 514 U.S. 334 (1995) CASE BRIEF

MCINTYRE V. OHIO ELECTION COMMISSION

514 U.S. 334 (1995)

NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a dispute over an Ohio statute that prohibits the distribution of anonymous campaign literature.

FACTS: McIntyre distributed leaflets to persons attending a public meeting at a Middle School. The unsigned leaflets did not state whom they were from. A complaint was filed for violating 3599.09(A) of the Ohio Code. They imposed a fine of $100. The Franklin County Court of Common Pleas reversed: she did not 'mislead the public nor act in a surreptitious manner,' the court concluded that the statute was unconstitutional as applied to her conduct. The Ohio Court of Appeals, by a divided vote, reinstated the fine. The dissenting judge thought that Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60 (1960), in which the Court invalidated a city ordinance prohibiting all anonymous leafleting, compelled the Ohio court to adopt a narrowing construction of the statute to save its constitutionality. The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed by a divided vote. The majority distinguished Mrs. McIntyre's case from Talley on the ground that 3599.09(A) 'has as its purpose the identification of persons who distribute materials containing false statements.' The Ohio court believed that such a law should be upheld if the burdens imposed on the First Amendment rights of voters are 'reasonable' and 'nondiscriminatory.' The dissent argued that the statute should be tested under a more severe standard because of its significant effect 'on the ability of individual citizens to freely express their views in writing on political issues.' McIntyre (D), as the executor of her estate, has pursued her claim in this Court.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner