OLYMPIA, Wash. — Does free speech trump Washington's campaign-finance laws?

The state Supreme Court was urged yesterday to overturn a ruling that forced two radio talk-show hosts to report the value of airtime they devoted to a gas-tax rollback initiative they launched last year.

Critics, including the libertarian public-interest law firm Institute for Justice, called last summer's ruling by Thurston County Superior Court a stunning blow against free speech and an unfettered press. But lawyers for San Juan County, Seattle, Kent and Auburn, who pressed the original complaint, said the disclosure was essential information for voters.

The high court peppered both sides with questions — and the queries seemed to tip toward the position of First Amendment rights trumping campaign-finance laws. The nine justices, though, gave no clear signs how they might rule. A written opinion could come down later this year.

In a case that has drawn widespread news-media attention, Superior Court Judge Chris Wickham ruled last summer that KVI Radio talk-show hosts John Carlson and Kirby Wilbur were key organizers and promoters of Initiative 912, a ballot measure aimed at heading off a four-step, 9.5-cent-a-gallon increase in the state gasoline tax.

The judge said the pair used their shows to launch the campaign, soliciting contributions and volunteers. He said the air time amounted to an in-kind contribution to the campaign and required that the value be reported to the state Public Disclosure Commission.

Ordinarily, on-air editorials are not reportable as campaign contributions, Wickham said, making a distinction based on what he called the duo's central role as the campaign's originators.

Wilbur, Carlson and the station said their role with the initiative was within the normal bounds of radio fare.

After the ruling, the No New Gas Tax campaign reported the value as a $20,000 in-kind contribution from the Seattle station's owner, Fisher Broadcasting. The campaign also reported its calculation of what various newspaper accounts were worth, acknowledging that the numbers had to be made up out of thin air.

Initiative 912 qualified for last November's ballot, but voters turned it down. A second installment of the tax is to take effect July 1.

Attorneys for the two sides framed the issue in broad terms yesterday.

William Maurer, representing the state chapter of the Institute for Justice, said the reporting requirement gives government power to regulate free speech and to even shade campaigns by squelching campaign debate that regulators don't like.

"It would give the government power to decide who gets to speak on the radio and to decide what may be said," he said, asserting later that it would allow a "quarantine on campaigns the government doesn't like," such as tax rollbacks.

But Mike Vaska, representing the local governments, rejected the idea that a financial-disclosure requirement had a chilling effect on free speech or campaign debate.

Regular news accounts, editorials and radio and TV commentary wouldn't be subject to campaign disclosure, except on the rare occasions where the publisher or the talk-show host is the candidate, he said.

In the KVI case, Carlson and Wilbur crossed a line and ran a campaign from behind the microphone, he said.

Many radio stations are owned by big national companies and Washington citizens need to know if those companies start trying to influence state voters, Vaska said.

Justices James Johnson and Richard Sanders sparred with Vaska, questioning his contention that the station and the talk-show hosts had a duty to report in-kind contributions, and his view that the report gave voters information they didn't already have.

Anyone who listened to KVI knew that Carlson and Wilbur were talking up the initiative, Johnson said. He also complained when lawyers talked about balancing campaign disclosure and free speech. The latter is protected by the Constitution, trumping state law, he said.

Justice Bobbe Bridge wondered aloud if Carlson and Wilbur didn't give the campaign an unfair advantage because of their constant access to the airwaves.

Chief Justice Gerry Alexander questioned whether a newspaper could give the same sort of undisclosed financial help to a campaign by writing a daily barrage of editorials. Both sides replied that such a strategy wouldn't trigger a reporting requirement.

Brett Bader, a Bellevue political consultant who headed the tax-rollback campaign, said after the hearing that Vaska was "trying to defend the indefensible" and likely to fail.

The initiative process and free speech are cherished by Washington voters and government has no right to clamp down on either, he said.

Vaska said talk radio has become more powerful in the political realm. Carlson ran for governor and pushed initiatives and KIRO Radio commentator Dave Ross ran for Congress last fall, he noted.

San Juan County Prosecutor Randy Gaylord said media companies should report their gift of airtime to campaigns, just as a real-estate developer would report the in-kind donation of free campaign space.

The KVI duo's role amounted to political advertising and must be reported, he said.

In earlier interviews, executives at Fisher Broadcasting said hosts are given wide latitude to discuss the issues of the day, including ballot measures.

The station's position was backed by the American Civil Liberties Union. "The government should not limit robust debate on controversial issues during an election campaign," said attorney Mike Kipling.