Law in Contemporary Society

View   r15  >  r14  >  r13  >  r12  >  r11  >  r10  ...
CitizensUnitedVFederalElectionCommission 15 - 06 Feb 2010 - Main.NathanStopper
Line: 1 to 1
 How do you guys feel about this decision? Although I haven't read the actual decision yet, I can only imagine how the holding is going to destroy any chance this country has of holding fair elections in the future. I don't really know too much about First Amendment law, but I am outraged that the Supreme Court has forfeited our democracy to uphold such an absurd principle. If anyone ever meets a corporation, please let me know.

-- NathanStopper - 23 Jan 2010

Line: 118 to 118
 
Assigned to Due date Description State Notify  
ArtCavazosJr Fri, 12 Feb 2010 Write 100 words about Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission after reading the opinions. EbenMoglen edit
Changed:
<
<
Assigned to Due date Description State Notify  
NathanStopper Fri, 12 Feb 2010 Write 100 words about Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission after reading the opinions. EbenMoglen edit
>
>
Assigned to Due date Description State Notify  
NathanStopper Fri, 12 Feb 2010 Write 100 words about Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission after reading the opinions. EbenMoglen edit
 
Line: 149 to 149
 http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu/twiki/bin/view/LawContempSoc/CitizensUnitedCaseNotes

-- AndrewCascini - 05 Feb 2010

Added:
>
>

“The appearance of influence or access will not cause the electorate to lose faith in our democracy.”

It is this kind of declaration that gives me the impression Kennedy is trying to rationalize a conclusion he already reached. He admits that the government can limit speech, but he concludes potential political corruption does not warrant such limitations. But instead of explaining why this qualify, he just cites a report that didn’t find any examples of “votes being changed for expenditures.” It seems to me that the best place to examine the potential for corruption and other effects of this holding would be the legislature. I remain unconvinced that the Court needed to overturn a century of legislation to protect this invented form of speech.

-- NathanStopper - 06 Feb 2010

-- NathanStopper - 06 Feb 2010

 
 
<--/commentPlugin-->

CitizensUnitedVFederalElectionCommission 14 - 05 Feb 2010 - Main.AndrewCascini
Line: 1 to 1
 How do you guys feel about this decision? Although I haven't read the actual decision yet, I can only imagine how the holding is going to destroy any chance this country has of holding fair elections in the future. I don't really know too much about First Amendment law, but I am outraged that the Supreme Court has forfeited our democracy to uphold such an absurd principle. If anyone ever meets a corporation, please let me know.

-- NathanStopper - 23 Jan 2010

Line: 138 to 138
 I guess we did deserve it. I'll add my notes as well.

-- NathanStopper - 05 Feb 2010

Added:
>
>

Here's my submission:

I fear the functional effects of the ruling. First, I believe the anti-distortion interest identified by the Court justified the FCRA, which restricted the ability of organizations to advertise directly for candidates through independent expenditures around election times. I am persuaded by Stevens that the FCRA did not restrict the free speech of any natural person. Secondly, products sold by corporations are now endowed with newly political significance. Some money from my purchases goes to corporate treasuries, which can now fund advertising supporting candidates in elections. Disclaimer and disclosure protections are inadequate to prevent consumer confusion resulting from this.

Also, here are my case notes. Nate, if you slap yours on the same page this one won't get any more cluttered.

http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu/twiki/bin/view/LawContempSoc/CitizensUnitedCaseNotes

-- AndrewCascini - 05 Feb 2010

 
 
<--/commentPlugin-->

CitizensUnitedVFederalElectionCommission 13 - 05 Feb 2010 - Main.NathanStopper
Line: 1 to 1
 How do you guys feel about this decision? Although I haven't read the actual decision yet, I can only imagine how the holding is going to destroy any chance this country has of holding fair elections in the future. I don't really know too much about First Amendment law, but I am outraged that the Supreme Court has forfeited our democracy to uphold such an absurd principle. If anyone ever meets a corporation, please let me know.

-- NathanStopper - 23 Jan 2010

Line: 133 to 133
 Hey, I'll put up my reading notes after I'm done in case anyone else wants them. I make those while I sort through cases if they're long (and this one is) because otherwise I can't keep anything straight.

-- AndrewCascini - 04 Feb 2010

Added:
>
>

I guess we did deserve it. I'll add my notes as well.

-- NathanStopper - 05 Feb 2010

 
 
<--/commentPlugin-->

CitizensUnitedVFederalElectionCommission 12 - 04 Feb 2010 - Main.AndrewCascini
Line: 1 to 1
 How do you guys feel about this decision? Although I haven't read the actual decision yet, I can only imagine how the holding is going to destroy any chance this country has of holding fair elections in the future. I don't really know too much about First Amendment law, but I am outraged that the Supreme Court has forfeited our democracy to uphold such an absurd principle. If anyone ever meets a corporation, please let me know.

-- NathanStopper - 23 Jan 2010

Line: 126 to 126
 I haven't read the decision yet, so in lieu of a legal opinion, I'll stick with link to a blog post by Marc Ambinder entitled The Corporations Already Outspend The Parties.

-- GloverWright - 04 Feb 2010

Added:
>
>

Ouch! Well, I earned it.

Hey, I'll put up my reading notes after I'm done in case anyone else wants them. I make those while I sort through cases if they're long (and this one is) because otherwise I can't keep anything straight.

-- AndrewCascini - 04 Feb 2010

 
 
<--/commentPlugin-->

CitizensUnitedVFederalElectionCommission 11 - 04 Feb 2010 - Main.GloverWright
Line: 1 to 1
 How do you guys feel about this decision? Although I haven't read the actual decision yet, I can only imagine how the holding is going to destroy any chance this country has of holding fair elections in the future. I don't really know too much about First Amendment law, but I am outraged that the Supreme Court has forfeited our democracy to uphold such an absurd principle. If anyone ever meets a corporation, please let me know.

-- NathanStopper - 23 Jan 2010

Line: 121 to 121
 
Assigned to Due date Description State Notify  
NathanStopper Fri, 12 Feb 2010 Write 100 words about Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission after reading the opinions. EbenMoglen edit
Added:
>
>

I haven't read the decision yet, so in lieu of a legal opinion, I'll stick with link to a blog post by Marc Ambinder entitled The Corporations Already Outspend The Parties.

-- GloverWright - 04 Feb 2010

 
 
<--/commentPlugin-->

Revision 15r15 - 06 Feb 2010 - 23:34:46 - NathanStopper
Revision 14r14 - 05 Feb 2010 - 04:50:36 - AndrewCascini
Revision 13r13 - 05 Feb 2010 - 00:12:51 - NathanStopper
Revision 12r12 - 04 Feb 2010 - 16:05:31 - AndrewCascini
Revision 11r11 - 04 Feb 2010 - 09:41:48 - GloverWright
Revision 10r10 - 04 Feb 2010 - 00:32:54 - EbenMoglen
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM