Citizens United has to be the worst Supreme Court decision since Dred Scott, because it is making our electoral process a cesspit of lies in which the liars have zero accountability for their deception. Thanks to the courage of Montana’s state Supreme Court, Citizens United may be revisited.
The U.S. Supreme Court is set to decide whether it should reconsider its controversial decision in the 2010 Citizens United decision that freed corporations and unions to make independent election expenditures. Whatever the court does, it should not back down from the core principle in the decision upholding the First Amendment.
The issue has come back to the court following a ruling by the Montana Supreme Court that the Citizens United decision does not apply to Montana’s state law regulating the campaign speech of corporations. The U.S. Supreme Court has been asked to strike down the Montana ruling because it runs counter to the federal interpretation of the First Amendment.
Attorneys general for the District of Columbia and 22 states — including Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller — take the opposite view. They argue that while the Citizens United ruling applies to federal election law, the states should be free to enforce state laws regulating corporate spending on state and local elections.
That would, in effect, mean two tiers of First Amendment protections, with less protection at the state level. The Supreme Court should not go there in this case, or in any case: Since the ratification of constitutional amendments following the Civil War, the court has extended the protections in the Bill of Rights to the states, and it should not reverse that now… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <DesMoines Register>
I agree with the author, because the representatives belong to their states, even though their offices are federal.
Rachel Maddow discussed the case with Montana AG, Steve Bullock.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Needless to millionaires, billionaires, and corporate criminals, along with their Republican sycophants, are all over this.
In my opinion, Citizens United stifles free speech. Just about the only defense regular people have against corporate political abuse is our right to choose not to patronize such companies. That’s our ‘speech’. Allowing corporations do drown the media in dishonest ads and to do so in secret, deprives us of our right to hold them accountable in the market place.
We can only hope that SCROTUS will have sufficient concern to preserve their legacy, since it is obvious to all but the most brainwashed Republicans that Citizens United is fatally flawed.
14 Responses to “Citizens United Revisited?”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Excellent clarification of the appalling decision– yes the DredScott case is a good analogy
Thanks, Phyllis.
The logic, or rational reasoning behind this decision escapes me; but I’m not a lawyer. I do know that money is the root of corruption in our politics and our government. If we cannot control that; then our law becomes the instrument of our downfall.
Steve, the problem is that the court includes one liberal, two moderate liberals, one moderate conservative (who usually votes with the liberals), one conservative and four extreme reactionary Republican activists. The rational reasoning behind the decision is that it helps Republicans buy an election proof regime. That was their intent.
I hope Kentucky is one of the 22 states supporting Montana, but I doubt it is. This is one of the worst decisions ever made by Scotus.
Edie, I agree.
It wouldn’t surprise me if SCOTUS does what SCOTUS does best — screw the people by playing partisan politics. In my opinion, the Montana law neeeds to stand. 100 years ago, people in Montana were very wise in recognising the power of money in their electoral process so they passed the Corrupt Practices Act. And it has served them well. But then Citizens United happened — a trash heap partisan SCOTUS decision that gave corporations personhood entitling them to 1st amendment rights. I hope SCOTUS does revisit Citizens United and allows the Montana Supreme Court’s decision to stand. I also hope that the whole Citizens United is reviewed. I’m not holding my breath on eithr count!
I’m not holding my breath either, Lynn. The conservative judges on SCROTUS are too beholdin’ to theKochs and their ilk.
I agree. Long term, the solution must be to replace SCROTUS with SCOTUS.
New York, leading 21 other states and the District of Columbia, is asking the Supreme Court — which ruled in favor of Citizens United — to let stand Montana’s state-level restrictions on campaign expenditures, according to the Associated Press.
Hoooray for the great liberal state of NY, my home sweet home! All 50 states should be on board but, alas, RepublicanTs have control in too many of them.
Congrats, Patty!
Being born a Green Mountain Boy now residing in Florida, I support Senator Bernie Sanders…. 🙂
The SCOTUS needs to fix this mess….
I doubt that they will. 🙁