HIGH COURT UPHOLDS BAN ON CONTRIBUTIONS.

Byline: Staff and Wire Services

In a likely precursor to how it will rule in a much broader case, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a ban Monday on contributions from advocacy groups, including corporations and unions.

Ruling in a North Carolina case, the justices rejected a constitutional challenge to a 32-year-old congressional ban that prohibited contributions from groups on issues such as gun and abortion rights.

In its 7-2 ruling, the court majority said the right to free speech does not override the power and Congress' goal of limiting the use of corporate money in politics.

The ruling gave a boost to supporters of the new federal campaign finance law authored by U.S. Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Russell Feingold, D-Wis. A special court session is scheduled for September to review the measure and its ban on corporate, union and unlimited contributions to national political party committees.

It also was praised by local officials who are seeking a similar ban in Los Angeles.

``This doesn't impact state law at all where corporations and unions are exempt,'' said Bob Stern of the Center for Governmental Studies, which reviews campaign reform laws. ``But it could encourage supporters in Los Angeles where a ban on such contributions is being considered.''

The City Council gave preliminary approval in April to a measure that would further tighten regulations governing contributions by independent committees. The measure is still being drafted in the City Attorney's Office.

Ethics Commission spokeswoman Barbara Freeman said the city is looking to increase disclosure requirements, but also is seeking to ban corporate and union donations.

``On the surface, this decision doesn't have much impact on the city other than giving support to the concept of limiting donations,'' Freeman said.

Stern, however, said the ruling is embraced by reformers.

``This is something we have been looking at as a way to try to reduce spending in campaigns,'' Stern said, acknowledging it could create other problems where a donor's connection to a corporation or union is unknown.

The McCain-Feingold measure bans a range of interest groups, including those financed with corporate or union money and those failing to disclose their donors, from airing ads mentioning federal candidates in their districts the month before a primary and two months before a general election.

In the case decided Monday, advocacy groups argued their members should be allowed to pool their money for use in an election to back candidates who support their views.

The government maintained that the groups could be used to circumvent individual campaign donation limits, with little public disclosure about the source of the money.

Currently, only individuals, political parties, political action committees and other campaigns can contribute to federal candidates and national party committees. The court's ruling Monday maintains that status quo and continues a trend in which the high court has been willing to uphold limits on contributions.