The U.S. Supreme Court petition was extraordinary—so heavily redacted that even parts of the question presented to the justices could not be read. Still, in an election year in which money is flowing like Niagara Falls, the petition raised compelling issues of campaign finance law and judicial ethics.
The high court on May 19 is scheduled to consider three prosecutors’ motion to file a petition under seal in Chisholm v. Two Unnamed Petitioners—with redacted copies for the public. Thanks to an unnamed party, the redacted petition is already available online.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
