| McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued October 12, 1994 Decided April 19, 1995 | |
| Full case name | Joseph McIntyre, executor of Estate of Margaret McIntyre, deceased, petitioner v. Ohio Elections Commission, et al. |
| Docket no. | 93-986 |
| Citations | 514 U.S. 334 (more) 115 S. Ct. 1511; 131 L. Ed. 2d 426; 1995 U.S. LEXIS 2847 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
| Case history | |
| Prior | 67 Ohio St. 3d 391, 618 N.E.2d 152 (1993); cert. granted, 510 U.S. 1108 (1994). |
| Subsequent | On remand, 72 Ohio St. 3d 1544, 650 N.E.2d 903 (1995). |
| Holding | |
| Ohio's prohibition of the distribution of anonymous campaign literature abridges the freedom of speech in violation of the First Amendment. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Stevens, joined by O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer |
| Concurrence | Ginsburg |
| Concurrence | Thomas (in judgment) |
| Dissent | Scalia, joined by Rehnquist |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. I | |
McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, 514 U.S. 334 (1995), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that an Ohio statute prohibiting anonymous campaign literature is unconstitutional because it violates the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects the freedom of speech. In a 7–2 decision authored by Justice John Paul Stevens, the Court found that the First Amendment protects the decision of an author to remain anonymous.
On April 27, 1988, Margaret McIntyre stood outside of a middle school in Westerville, Ohio, and passed out anonymous leaflets that opposed a proposed school district tax levy. The Ohio Elections Commission fined McIntyre $100 for violating a state law that prohibited the distribution of any kind of political or campaign literature that does not have the name and address of the person responsible for its contents. With the help of the American Civil Liberties Union, McIntyre appealed the fine in court. The county court reversed the fine, holding that because McIntyre did not attempt to mislead the public, the Ohio statute was unconstitutional as it applied to her actions. However, the state court of appeals reinstated the fine, referring to a 1922 decision by the Ohio Supreme Court as precedent, and the Ohio Supreme Court affirmed.
The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Ohio Supreme Court on April 19, 1995. As precedent, the Court referred to its decision in Talley v. California (1960), in which the Court found a similar law prohibiting anonymous leafletting unconstitutional, as well as the role of anonymous political literature throughout history, one example being The Federalist Papers. The Court's majority opinion emphasized the importance of anonymous speech, describing it as "not a pernicious, fraudulent practice, but an honorable tradition of advocacy and of dissent".[1] The effect of the Court's opinion on anonymous speech has been analyzed in the contexts of television and radio advertisements, campaign finance, and the Internet.
- ^ McIntyre, 514 U.S. 334 at 357.