If you’ve been “enjoying” the barrage of campaign ads, you probably want to check out yesterday’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court not to accept an appeal in the case of SpeechNow.org v FEC.

The case already resulted in striking down limits on contributions to groups which sponsor independent ads for or against candidates. In its appeal to the Supreme Court, SpeechNow.org sought to challenge the remaining requirement that it register as a political action committee, disclose its activities, and file regular reports with the FEC.

The court’s action yesterday resulted in stories in the Washington Post and the Christian Science Monitor, but got only a passing mention in a New York Times story on several court actions. Last month, a Times story explained the background and issues in the case.

From the Center for Competitive Politics, which supported the plaintiffs’

SpeechNow.org-styled groups are flourishing and making an enormous impact in this election cycle. Despite today’s denial by the U.S. Supreme Court of their petition challenging PAC regulations, SpeechNow.org achieved an important victory for First Amendment rights.

In a lower court ruling, SpeechNow.org, a group of individuals who sought to pool their money to buy ads supporting candidates with good First Amendment track records and oppose those who limit free speech, won the most important aspect of this case: vindicating the right for individuals to join together and raise and spend unlimited funds to support or oppose candidates. Grassroots groups of citizens, led by SpeechNow.org’s example, are now on par with wealthy individuals, corporations and unions, raising the money they need to have an effective voice in this year’s political campaigns. Unfortunately, these groups must still navigate the thicket of PAC regulations imposed by the FEC while individuals, corporations and unions need only file minimal disclosure forms.

From The Campaign Legal Center, which supports campaign finance restrictions:

“The Court’s decision not to take the case is a victory for disclosure and a reaffirmation of its little-noted but nearly unanimous ruling in Citizens United upholding federal disclosure provisions,” said Tara Malloy, Associate Legal Counsel with the Campaign Legal Center. “We hope it encourages Congress to again take up the DISCLOSE Act after the November elections, and provides further confirmation that meaningful political disclosure is not only good policy, but a constitutional exercise of Congress’s authority to ensure the integrity of elections. Besieged by anonymous political advertising this fall, the American people expect Congress to act to address this flood of secret spending in our elections.”

PR Watch.org has taken an in-depth look at SpeechNow.org’s targeting of Senator Russ Feingold, find a web of money from major donors.