meta_pixel
Tapesearch Logo
Log in
Cato Podcast

How States Protect and Punish Political Speech

Cato Podcast

Cato Institute

Immigration, News, News Commentary, Peace, 424708, Markets, Government, Libertarian, Policy, Politics, Cato, Defense

4.5979 Ratings

🗓️ 17 November 2022

⏱️ 16 minutes

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

How do states rank when it comes to protecting the right to speak publicly about politics? Scott Blackburn is author of The Free Speech Index at the Institute for Free Speech.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0

This is the Cato Daily Podcast for Thursday, November 17th, 2022.

0:07.0

I'm Caleb Brown. State election laws vary widely and the ability for average people to engage in effective speech on behalf of candidates

0:14.7

or propositions is often unclear.

0:17.7

The Institute for Free Speech has begun cataloging state laws governing speech in the political arena.

0:23.4

Scott Blackburn is the author of the free speech index.

0:27.6

In the heat of an election,

0:30.8

candidates say things. Candidates proxies say things. candidates independent expenditures, and they say things, all in an attempt to earn the votes of

0:46.5

voters on election day. So to what extent do states prevent people from making statements and to what extent do and how do they differ across states in terms of actually saying oh you can't say that we're close to an election you can't say it and it wasn't that long ago the federal government had laws on the books that would actively prevent that what happens at the state level?

1:23.0

So there are three major ways that states attempt to regulate what you can say in a political election.

1:31.6

The first and most direct is, as you said, some states continue to have laws that say we can prosecute you or someone can sue you for your false political speech. So if you run a political ad we think it's false

1:46.5

we can we can come after you for that speech. That has been ruled unconstitutional.

1:51.1

has been ruled on constitutional for almost 20 years now in a case called

1:54.4

SBA V. Dry House. Nonetheless, about half the states continue to have laws like

2:00.5

that on the books, including my home state of Ohio, where SBA v Dry House was played out.

2:07.2

What decisions like that do is it means that if you are looking up the law, if you're an amateur, if you're trying to figure out what you can and cannot do, it may seem like you could be sued for what's in your political ad.

2:20.0

You cannot be, that that case would not go forward

2:23.7

But it it affects your speech and chills what what you're willing to do

2:28.6

I a good friend of mine is a campaign finance attorney and has been for decades at very high levels and when he gets approached,

2:37.6

but he tells me that at least when he gets approached by mom and pop, you know, a bunch of guys together with a cigar box full of money

2:45.2

that want to spend it to influence local elections.

2:48.3

His honest advice to them is don't and that is because of the complicated nature of laws that

2:58.0

amateurs are trying to interpret and do not understand the complications of engaging in core political speech.

...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Cato Institute, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of Cato Institute and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.

Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.