SAVE MONEY ON TRAVEL DEALS

The justices said new argument should address two key Supreme Court precedents upholding federal election law and whether the high court should "overrule either or both."

At stake in the case is a provision of a 2002 federal campaign law that bans "election communications" funded by corporations or unions close to an election.

The justices heard argument earlier this term, with former U.S. Solicitor General Ted Olson representing the producers of "Hillary, the Movie." The film's backers wanted to make it available as an "on demand" movie on cable television during the 2008 race for the presidency.

But federal courts ruled the movie, financed partly with funds from unnamed corporations, violated the 2002 McCain-Feingold law.

Deputy U.S. Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart, defending the law, suggested the Constitution not only allows the restriction of the "documentary" message when offered "on demand", but also on the Internet, on a DVD or in a book, even at a public library.

(Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission, No. 08-205.)

 BREAKING STORIES

Sony asks for healthier concession snacks

Winslet and Mendes separate

Crowning ceremony held for Tiana in N.Y.

Schneider leaving 'Parks and Recreation'

Schwimmer and Buckman get engaged

Feldman won't attend Haim's funeral

Barrymore 'happier now than ever'

GLAAD Media Awards presented in New York

Disney shutting down Zemeckis studio

'Avatar' may get second theater release

Haim death tied to prescription drug ring

Damon says he may play Bourne again

Malkovich to star in London play

Donations sought for Haim's funeral

Green recalls Haim as sweet, earnest

Weaving may play 'Capt. America' villain

Report: Heigl leaving 'Grey's Anatomy'

'2012' tops DVD sales, rental charts

Alan Tudyk joins 'Rockford' pilot

Third 'Chipmunks' flick to be 3-D