FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

March 27, 2008

ALEXANDRIA, VA — The Center for Individual Freedom (CFIF) last week filed a lawsuit asking a federal court to strike down as unconstitutional a West Virginia law that forbids independent issue ads during election periods unless it and other similarly situated speakers abide by onerous and constitutionally suspect reporting requirements.

CFIF filed its complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, alleging that several provisions of state law are vague and overbroad, and thus violate the First Amendment.

“The First Amendment, as made applicable to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment, mandates that the government ‘shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or … to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,’” the complaint reads. “A core purpose of this provision is to protect free, open, and robust public discourse concerning issues and candidates at the time of elections.”

“The U.S. Supreme Court has said time and again that any restrictions on spending for core speech must, on their face, provide a bright line and objective standard so speakers know in advance precisely what is permitted,” said CFIF President Jeffrey Mazzella. “But the vague language of West Virginia’s statute ignores that clear and precise command, leaving us with no way of knowing what speech is and is not permitted.

"Voters are most attuned to public issue discussions at election time, but the West Virginia statute, which threatens serious civil and criminal penalties, has left CFIF no choice but to self-sensor," Mazzella continued.

In 2006, CFIF prevailed in a similar lawsuit against a Louisiana statute similar to that of West Virginia. In that case, the U.S. Court of Appeals in New Orleans agreed with CFIF and limited Louisiana's statute to speech that expressly advocates the election or defeat of identified candidates, a standard the U.S. Supreme Court repeatedly has endorsed. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear Louisiana's appeal, allowing the appeals court decision to stand.

Last year, CFIF challenged a similar law in Pennsylvania. CFIF and Pennsylvania’s Attorney General agreed to a stipulated judgment, which was signed and entered by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, declaring that the state’s speech restrictions only apply to express advocacy.

In full compliance with that stipulated judgment, CFIF launched issue ads in the state. In violation of that stipulated judgment, Pennsylvania’s Commonwealth Secretary and Attorney General filed a lawsuit seeking to silence CFIF's speech and remove its ads from the air. The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania in Harrisburg ruled in CFIF's favor, denying the state's request to force its ads off the air. CFIF is now seeking permanent relief. That action is pending before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

In West Virginia, CFIF seeks a prompt hearing and a preliminary injunction to assure that it is able to prepare and run issue ads in the weeks leading up to the state’s May primary elections and the general election in November. CFIF names as defendants West Viginia Secretary of State Betty Ireland, and Timothy D. Boggess, Prosecuting Attorney for Mercer County, as a representative of the class of prosecuting attorneys in the state.

CFIF is represented by Jan Witold Baran, Thomas W. Kirby, and Caleb P. Burns of the Washington, D.C. firm Wiley Rein LLP.