Book banning

If you think we have, over the years, exaggerated the threat posed to the First Amendment by "campaign reform," consider Tuesday's Supreme Court arguments in the case of "Hillary: The Movie."

A federal court last year ruled that the film -- an independently produced 90-minute hit piece on Hillary Clinton released during last year's presidential campaign -- should be regulated under McCain-Feingold, which prohibits certain political advertising leading up to an election.

But if the federal government can regulate a politically tinged documentary, Justice Samuel Alito asked, could it also do the same to a book that advocated the election or defeat of a politician?

Astonishingly, Malcom Stewart, deputy solicitor general of the United States, replied in the affirmative "if the book contained the functional equivalent of express advocacy."

Someone please pass Mr. Stewart a copy of the Constitution he swore to defend.

"When the government is taking the position that it can ban books because they are financed by corporations, it is time to scrap the campaign finance laws," said Steve Simpson, an attorney for the Institute for Justice. "This is America. We don't ban books here."

At least not yet, anyway.