# Rickert v. Public Disclosure Commission

> Washington Supreme Court · October 4, 2007 · 161 Wash. 2d 843

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4713760

## Case

- **Full name:** Marilou Rickert v. The Public Disclosure Commission
- **Court:** Washington Supreme Court
- **Decided:** October 4, 2007
- **Citations:** 161 Wash. 2d 843
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Alexander
- **Judges:** Alexander, Johnson, Madsen
- **Cited by:** 19 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4713760

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- applying strict scrutiny to Washington false-statement law

## Opinion text

¶28
Alexander, C. J.
(concurring) — In my view, the majority goes too far in concluding that any government censorship of political speech would run afoul of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that defamation is not protected by the First Amendment. Bose Corp. v. Consum *857 ers Union of U.S., Inc., 466 U.S. 485, 504 , 104 S. Ct. 1949 , 80 L. Ed. 2d 502 (1984); Beauharnais v. Illinois, 343 U.S. 250, 266 , 72 S. Ct. 725 , 96 L. Ed. 919 (1952). The government, thus, may penalize defamatory political speech. The statute at issue here, however, prohibits nondefamatory speech in addition to defamatory speech. Thus, I concur in the majority’s conclusion that RCW 42.17.530(1)(a) is unconstitutionally overbroad.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4713760. Public record. Not legal advice.