BREAKING: Supreme Court strikes down Ford government’s third-party political ads law. Restrictions on third-party advertising… let political parties ‘drown out’ other groups such as unions|TheTrillium
BREAKING: Supreme Court strikes down Ford government’s third-party political ads law. Restrictions on third-party advertising… let political parties ‘drown out’ other groups such as unions|TheTrillium
Supreme Court strikes down Ford government’s third-party political ads law
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/40228347
The Supreme Court of Canada has struck down a Ford government law that restricted political advertising by third parties, such as unions, in the year ahead of a scheduled election campaign.
The top court ruled in a 5-4 decision that the law allowed for political parties’ ads to “drown out” those of third-party groups, infringing on citizens' right to meaningfully participate in the democratic process.
“The information available to voters in Ontario in the year before an election must include the interests, voices and views of different citizens and parties,” reads the majority decision written by Justice Andromache Karakatsanis.
This is good for unions and other above-board groups, but I can't help but wonder how this affects the various "dark money" lobby groups that have unclear ownership, but have been buying political ads across the country.
please, I beg of you, control this closely. the citizens united case in the us drove a stake through the heart of this country.
This is exactly what I thought of when I read it. Although moneyed interests always have ways of influencing politics, a decision like this will help the bosses more than the unions.
I wrote a list of most promising counters to dark money.
As long as they are citizens it is their right to " meaningfully participate in the democratic process" whether you agree with them, like it, or not.
I would argue that we at least have the right to know who they are. In the case of unions, that's certainly the case.
The thing is, should people have the right for their voice to be louder than others, and to participate with more force, just because they have more money?