McConnell v. Federal Election Comm'n, 540 U.S. 93, 142 (2003)

Page:   Index   Previous  135  136  137  138  139  140  141  142  143  144  145  146  147  148  149  Next

Cite as: 540 U. S. 93 (2003)

Opinion of the Court

against broadcasts devoted to public affairs, see ibid.; 47 U. S. C. § 315(a); Red Lion, 395 U. S., at 380.

The McConnell plaintiffs claim that the statutory language—"political matter of national importance" or "national legislative issue of public importance"—is unconstitutionally vague or overbroad. Brief for McConnell Plaintiffs 74-75. But that language is no more general than the language that Congress has used to impose other obligations upon broadcasters. Compare 47 U. S. C. § 315(e)(1)(B) (Supp. II) ("political matter of national importance") and § 315(e)(1)(B)(iii) ("national legislative issue of public importance") (both added by BCRA § 504), with 47 U. S. C. § 315(a) ("obligation . . . to operate in the public interest" and to afford reasonable opportunity for discussion of "issues of public importance"); § 317(a)(2) (FCC disclosure requirements relating to any "political program" or "discussion of any controversial issue"); cf. 47 CFR § 73.1212(e) (2002) ("political matter or . . . a controversial issue of public importance") and 9 Fed. Reg. 14734 (1944) ("public controversial issues"); ante, at 222-223 ( joint opinion) (noting that the experience under longstanding regulations undermines claims of chilling effect). And that language is also roughly comparable to other language in BCRA that we uphold today. E. g., ante, at 169-170, and n. 64 ( joint opinion) (upholding 2 U. S. C. § 431(20)(A)(iii) (Supp. II) ("public communication that refers to a clearly identified candidate for Federal office . . . and that promotes or supports a candidate for that office, or attacks or opposes a candidate for that office")); ante, at 222-223 (upholding 2 U. S. C. § 441a(a)(7)(B)(ii) (Supp. II) (counting as coordinated disbursements that are made "in cooperation, consultation, or concert with, or at the request or suggestion of [a political party]") against challenge and noting that an "agreement" is not necessary for precision).

Whether these requirements impose disproportionate administrative burdens is more difficult to say. On the one

241

Page:   Index   Previous  135  136  137  138  139  140  141  142  143  144  145  146  147  148  149  Next

Last modified: October 4, 2007