Justices hear ‘Hillary’ movie case

“Hillary: The Movie” made its Supreme Court premiere Tuesday morning with reviews from the justices suggesting the case could lead to the banning of political books during the election season and the possible collapse of the nation’s campaign finance law.

Citizens United, a conservative group that produced the documentary of the former presidential candidate and released the film during the primary season last year, refused to abide by the McCain-Feingold law that required they include political disclosure language in movie advertisements.

Although the ads Citizens United planned to run did not express advocacy for or against Mrs. Clinton, Malcolm L. Stewart, Justice Department deputy solicitor general, said the movie clearly did express opposition to her candidacy and therefore television ads promoting the film should abide by the campaign law.

“I saw it, it’s not a musical comedy,” Justice Stephen Breyer said.

But Justice Anthony Kennedy noted that if a 90-minute film is covered by the campaign law, “then the whole statute should fall.”

The suggestion that the campaign law also bans any political message funded in part by corporations, including book publishers, raised further questions by the justices.

“That’s pretty incredible,” said Justice Samuel Alito. “You think that if a book was published, a campaign biography that was the functional equivalent of express advocacy, that could be banned?”

It would not be banned, Mr. Stewart said, but it must adhere to campaign laws.

Theodore B. Olson, arguing on behalf of Citizens United, countered that not adhering to the law brings a penalty of five years in prison.