Democracy joins Habeas Corpus and the Geneva Conventions as another “quaint” idea.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has ruled that corporations may spend freely to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress, easing decades-old limits on their participation in federal campaigns.

By a 5-4 vote, the court on Thursday overturned a 20-year-old ruling that said corporations can be prohibited from using money from their general treasuries to pay for their own campaign ads. The decision, which almost certainly will also allow labor unions to participate more freely in campaigns, threatens similar limits imposed by 24 states.

It leaves in place a prohibition on direct contributions to candidates from corporations and unions.

Critics of the stricter limits have argued that they amount to an unconstitutional restraint of free speech, and the court majority apparently agreed.

“The censorship we now confront is vast in its reach,” Justice Anthony Kennedy said in his majority opinion, joined by his four more conservative colleagues.

However, Justice John Paul Stevens, dissenting from the main holding, said, “The court’s ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions around the nation.”

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor joined Stevens’ dissent, parts of which he read aloud in the courtroom.

The justices also struck down part of the landmark McCain-Feingold campaign finance bill that barred union- and corporate-paid issue ads in the closing days of election campaigns.

Advocates of strong campaign finance regulations have predicted that a court ruling against the limits would lead to a flood of corporate and union money in federal campaigns as early as this year’s midterm congressional elections.

The decision, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, removes limits on independent expenditures that are not coordinated with candidates’ campaigns.

The case also does not affect political action committees, which mushroomed after post-Watergate laws set the first limits on contributions by individuals to candidates. Corporations, unions and others may create PACs to contribute directly to candidates, but they must be funded with voluntary contributions from employees, members and other individuals, not by corporate or union treasuries.

Why don’t we just count humans as 3/5’s of a person and be done with it?

You know that whole “Experiment in Democracy” crap you used to read about in school? The experiment just failed.

That sound you hear is Jefferson and Madison drilling toward the core of the earth.

3 Replies to “Democracy joins Habeas Corpus and the Geneva Conventions as another “quaint” idea.”

  1. No worries Tom, although I thank you. I have friends running the range of the political spectrum, despite being predominantly liberal in my own leanings. I don’t believe in living in an echo chamber where you only hear from people who agree with you. @Joe as you may imagine I do have a lot of "hot button" issues after the past four years. There are a LOT of democrats who have earned my ire as well. Still, there have been 40+ funerals in my social circles/family since Katrina and the levee failure. Would love to talk NOLA sometime, where did you live and what were you doing? (I’m a Garden District kid with a foot in the 9th Ward myself)

  2. No worries Tom, although I thank you. I have friends running the range of the political spectrum, despite being predominantly liberal in my own leanings. I don’t believe in living in an echo chamber where you only hear from people who agree with you. @Joe as you may imagine I do have a lot of "hot button" issues after the past four years. There are a LOT of democrats who have earned my ire as well. Still, there have been 40+ funerals in my social circles/family since Katrina and the levee failure. Would love to talk NOLA sometime, where did you live and what were you doing? (I’m a Garden District kid with a foot in the 9th Ward myself)

  3. No worries Tom, although I thank you. I have friends running the range of the political spectrum, despite being predominantly liberal in my own leanings. I don’t believe in living in an echo chamber where you only hear from people who agree with you. @Joe as you may imagine I do have a lot of "hot button" issues after the past four years. There are a LOT of democrats who have earned my ire as well. Still, there have been 40+ funerals in my social circles/family since Katrina and the levee failure. Would love to talk NOLA sometime, where did you live and what were you doing? (I’m a Garden District kid with a foot in the 9th Ward myself)

Comments are closed.