About: Buckley v. Valeo

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- Rule:
- Inverse Functional Properties:
- "Same As":

About: Buckley v. Valeo Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : umbel-rc:Event, within Data Space : dbpedia.org associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon

http://dbpedia.org/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org%2Fresource%2FBuckley_v._Valeo

Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court on campaign finance. A majority of justices held that, as provided by section 608 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, limits on election expenditures are unconstitutional. In a per curiam (by the Court) opinion, they ruled that expenditure limits contravene the First Amendment provision on freedom of speech because a restriction on spending for political communication necessarily reduces the quantity of expression. It limited disclosure provisions and limited the Federal Election Commission's power. Justice Byron White dissented in part and wrote that Congress had legitimately recognized unlimited election spending "as a mortal danger against which effective preventive and curative steps must be

Attributes	Values
rdf:type	Thing case Legal Case unit of work Legal case yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCases yago:Abstraction100002137 yago:Case107308889 yago:Event100029378 yago:Happening107283608 yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity Supreme Court of the United States case umbel-rc:Event
rdfs:label	Buckley v. Valeo (en) Buckley v. Valeo (fr)
rdfs:comment	L'arrêt Buckley v. Valeo (424 U.S. 1, 1976) de la Cour suprême des États-Unis concerne le financement des campagnes électorales et le Ier Amendement sur la liberté d'expression. La décision fut donnée per curiam c'est-à-dire sans être attribuée à un juge en particulier, mais cinq juges ont délivré chacun une opinion séparée développant des points d'accord et de désaccord. (fr) Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court on campaign finance. A majority of justices held that, as provided by section 608 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, limits on election expenditures are unconstitutional. In a per curiam (by the Court) opinion, they ruled that expenditure limits contravene the First Amendment provision on freedom of speech because a restriction on spending for political communication necessarily reduces the quantity of expression. It limited disclosure provisions and limited the Federal Election Commission's power. Justice Byron White dissented in part and wrote that Congress had legitimately recognized unlimited election spending "as a mortal danger against which effective preventive and curative steps must be (en)
foaf:name	James L. Buckley, et al. v. Francis R. Valeo, Secretary of the United States Senate, et al. (en)
foaf:depiction
dcterms:subject	United States elections case law Appointments Clause case law United States Supreme Court cases United States separation of powers case law United States equal protection case law United States Free Speech Clause case law American Civil Liberties Union litigation 1976 in United States case law United States administrative case law United States Supreme Court cases of the Burger Court Federal Election Commission litigation
Wikipage page ID	439493 (xsd:integer)
Wikipage revision ID	1093911331 (xsd:integer)
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage	United States elections case law Harper v. Canada (Attorney General) Appearance of corruption Appointments Clause case law List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 424 Peace and Freedom Party United States Congress United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit United States District Court for the District of Columbia United States Senate Declaratory judgment Due process Injunction LexisNexis List of landmark court decisions in the United States United States Supreme Court cases Conservative Party of New York State United States Constitution Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission Freedom of speech Gerald Ford Bowman v United Kingdom Corruption United States presidential election 1968 United States presidential election Libertarian Party (United States) Federal Election Campaign Act Fundraising United States separation of powers case law Byron White CCH (company) United States equal protection case law Thurgood Marshall Tillman Act of 1907 U.S. Supreme Court Lady lawyer Lawyers' Edition Secretary of the United States Senate Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 American Conservative Union United States Free Speech Clause case law Eugene McCarthy Federal Election Commission Federal government of the United States First Amendment to the United States Constitution First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti Francis R. Valeo Per curiam decision James L. Buckley Article Two of the United States Constitution American Civil Liberties Union litigation 1976 in United States case law United States administrative case law United States Supreme Court cases of the Burger Court Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution Federal Election Commission litigation New York Civil Liberties Union New York Times Co. v. Sullivan Campaign finance in the United States Separation of powers McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission United States Code Plaintiff First Amendment Ex officio US Supreme Court Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971

Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git139 as of Feb 29 2024

Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3330 as of Mar 19 2024, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc212), Single-Server Edition (61 GB total memory, 49 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software