Rickert v. Public Disclosure Commission
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
*845¶1 The United States and Washington Constitutions both protect the right of free speech, and political speech is the core of that right. The notion that a censorship scheme like RCW 42.17.530(1)(a) may be constitutionally enforced by a government agency erroneously “presupposes [that] the State possesses an independent right to determine truth and falsity in political debate.” State ex rel. Pub. Disclosure Comm’n v. 119 Vote No! Comm., 135 Wn.2d 618, 624-25, 957 P.2d 691 (1998) (plurality opinion). Yet, “ ‘[t]he very purpose of the First Amendment is to foreclose public authority from…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Perry Education Ass'n v. Perry Local Educators' Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- St. Amant v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- City of Seattle v. McCreadyWashington Supreme Court · 1997
- State v. SieyesWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- Susan B. Anthony List v. DriehausCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2016
- Commonwealth v. LucasMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2015
- Larry Seaquist v. Michelle CaldierCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.