High court refuses case by Ohio blogger

Conservative blogger does not want to register as PAC

The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal from a conservative blogger who claimed the Ohio Elections Commission incorrectly required him to register with the state as a political action committee.

The justices, without comment Monday, let stand the 2011 ruling by the commission that Ohio law required an organization, such as the blogger’s web site, to register as a PACC if its “primary or main purpose’’ was to support or oppose candidates or political parties.

Edmund Corsi, who wrote under the web site Geauga Constitutional Council, insisted that the state law did not cover his web site, which cost him about $40 a month to maintain and about $200 a year in other expenses.

Corsi was sharply critical of the chairman of Geauga County Republican Party Chairman Ed Ryder, who filed a complaint with the elections commission.

Bradley A. Smith, a law professor at Capital University and a former Federal Election Commission board member, helped Corsi file his appeal to the justices.

In an opinion piece last month in the Wall Street Journal, Smith sarcastically wrote that Corsi launched his “life of political crime’’ by starting his web site.

Smith wrote that “it is inconceivable’’ that “America’s founders thought the First Amendment would allow the government to routinely require citizens to report their political activity, and be subjected to such complex regulations. They wanted to prevent government from doing precisely this sort of thing.’’

In addition, the justices Monday upheld a decision by a lower court that concluded the University of Toledo acted legally when it fired in 2008 an African-American administrator for writing an opinion piece that gay rights could not be compared with civil rights.

The justices refused to hear an appeal from Crystal Dixon, whose lawsuit against the University of Toledo was dismissed last year by a federal judge in Toledo.

Dixon, who had served as associate vice president for human resources at the university, claimed the university had violated the First Amendment to the Constitution.

About the Author