| | |
|
CitizensUnitedVFederalElectionCommission 20 - 12 Feb 2010 - Main.ArtCavazosJr
|
| | I've rearranged this page so that our 100 word responses to the opinion are at the beginning. The conversation we had before reading the opinion is below. Art and Sam, when you guys add your responses, just put them under mine. I've also included the link that Glover posted in this section.
_________________________________ | | | After filing their revised briefs, both parties pointed out to the Court that it could easily avoid overturning those cases by applying a de minimus rule to the immediate case. This would exempt Citizens United from §441b because only a tiny fraction of its funding actually came from for-profit corporations. Justice Stevens, in his dissent, points out at least three additional ways in which the Court could have made a more narrow holding. However, the Court dismisses these arguments, blows past a century of precedent, and chooses to overrule the cases anyway. | |
<
< | Central, of course, to their ruling is that corporations are protected under the First Amendment, and that they are no different from wealthy "natural persons" (except for limited liability, perpetual life, etc; also they can't hold office or vote... yet). The Court obviously had an agenda with this case, and that is what upsets me most. Whether you agree or not with the outcome, the Court essentially asked themselves a question, and answered it by overruling the holdings of dozens of cases and Congressional Acts dating to 1907. | >
> | Central, of course, to their ruling is that corporations are protected under the First Amendment, and that they are no different from wealthy "natural persons" (except for limited liability, perpetual life, etc; also they can't hold office or vote... yet). The Court obviously had an agenda with this case, and that is what is most upsetting. Whether you agree or not with the outcome, the Court essentially asked themselves a question, and answered it by overruling the holdings of dozens of cases and Congressional Acts dating to 1907. | | | non-100 word version |
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
| | |