SORRELL v. IMS HEALTH INC.
Supreme Court Cases
564 U.S. 552 (2011)
Case Overview
Legal Principle at Issue
Do Vermonts mandatory limits on candidate expenditures violate the First Amendment as interpreted in Buckley v. Valeo (1976)?
Action
Affirmed (includes modified). Petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition.
Advocated for Respondent
- Timothy B. Tomasi View all cases
Advocated for Petitioner
- Mitchell L. Pearl View all cases
Cite this page
- SORRELL v. IMS HEALTH INC.. (n.d.). First Amendment Library. Retrieved July 3, 2025, from https://www.thefire.org/supreme-court/sorrell-v-ims-health-inc
- SORRELL v. IMS HEALTH INC., First Amendment Library, https://www.thefire.org/supreme-court/sorrell-v-ims-health-inc (last visited 3 Jul. 2025).
- Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE). "SORRELL v. IMS HEALTH INC.." Oyez. https://www.thefire.org/supreme-court/sorrell-v-ims-health-inc (accessed July 3, 2025).
- "SORRELL v. IMS HEALTH INC.." First Amendment Library. Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), n.d. 3 Jul. 2025, www.thefire.org/supreme-court/sorrell-v-ims-health-inc.