Appeals court allows political ad
MADISON — A conservative-leaning political group can continue to run an ad accusing a Democratic Assembly candidate of supporting free health care for illegal aliens, a state appeals court ruled Monday.
Mark Radcliffe of Black River Falls faces Republican Dan Hellman of Onalaska for an open Assembly seat in Tuesday’s election. His campaign asked Jackson County Circuit Judge Thomas Lister on Friday to ban the ad by the Coalition for America’s Families, calling it false and defamatory.
Lister issued a temporary restraining order against the ad on Saturday, barring it from the air waves. He refused to lift the order during a hearing on Sunday morning, but set another hearing for Monday. The Coalition for America’s Families asked the 4th District Court of Appeals Monday morning to erase the order.
Minutes before Monday’s proceeding, the appeals court decided to stay the restraining order. That means the order still exists but is unenforceable. The court said there’s no basis to prohibit the group’s free speech before the merits of the case are decided.
"This is a victory for the First Amendment, our right of free speech, and due process of the law," coalition spokesman R.J. Johnson said in a statement. He did not immediately return messages Monday seeking comment on whether the group would rerun the ads.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin ripped Lister, saying his restraining order was impermissible.
"Judges should not be in the business of deciding which political speech is acceptable for public consumption and which is not," ACLU of Wisconsin Executive Director Chris Ahmuty said in a statement.
Radcliffe conceded he can’t do anything more about the ad before the election. He said he’d decide after the race whether to pursue the matter further. Perhaps he can spare future politicians from dealing with lies, he said.
Politicians have long complained about third-party groups like the Coalition for America’s Families because they don’t have to disclose their funding. The Coalition has been running ads similar to the Radcliffe spot against Democratic Assembly candidates around the state. The ads take them to task for supporting state Senate Democrats’ failed universal health care plan, which the ads equate to government-run health care for illegal aliens.
Democrats have been pushing back against the ads for weeks, branding them lies. Johnson has argued the ads are accurate.
The health care program didn’t have any citizenship requirements. And Johnson maintains Radcliffe told Wisconsin Public Radio in August that Radcliffe thought the program was a good start toward affordable health care and legislators should work to pass it. Radcliffe said Monday he meant the health care program was a good place to start discussing health care changes, but he never supported it.
Hellman said he didn’t know the legal details, but Radcliffe’s actions show he’s running from his own statements.
Coalition for America’s Families attorney Robert Dreps said Lister recused himself from the case after the appeals court ruling came down, saying he didn’t want to appear biased in any future rulings since he’d already issued the restraining order.
Nov 4, 2008 at 1:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
A political ad that is deemed a lie by its opponents? Wow, next you're going to tell me the sun is going to rise in the morning. Bottom line, this was a pure and simple surpression of free speech. Of course, that's the liberal way, they're all for freedom of speech, as long as the speech agrees with their point of view. The same people who go into a tizzy when it's suggested that a simple ID be presented to vote have no problem with a liberal appointed judge fast tracking an un-constitutional injunction against free speech. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil I guess.
Nov 3, 2008 at 6:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
The last thing we need is Judge Lister and his ilk filtering our political rhetoric for us (it's bad enough that the news media does so). Judges have the same human frailties as the rest of us such as an agenda, personal and political biases, etc. What they think is inappropriate may be their considered opinion, but I prefer to apply my own standards as to whether an ad like this is "over the line" as I am sure that most everyone else would prefer to judge for themselves the veracity of such speech, particularly when candidates have ample opportunities to rebut such claims. Thank you for your concern Judge Lister, but we are not in need of your protection in this matter.
Was this ad a lie? I think that it does stretch the truth, yes. On the other hand, unless the universal health care that some elected officials tout specifically excludes illegal immigrants, how can they not be included in light of the fact that illegal immigrants are entitled to other government programs such as public education, food stamps, etc., at least until they are deported? Since many communities are actively working against the deportation of illegal immigrants (sanctuary cities and the like) then the likelihood of illegal immigrants taking advantage of universal health care becomes high without such specific exclusion.
Nov 3, 2008 at 5:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
These ads are way out there aren't they.. Although government mandated health care is poison for America, these ADs were taking it a little too far...
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.