A federal court has come to the fairly common sense realization that when the Constitution says “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press,” it kind of means it:
A federal court in Alexandria, Va. on Thursday struck down a federal ban on corporate campaign contributions, in a case with potentially dramatic ramifications for a campaign finance regulatory system under siege by legal and regulatory attacks.
The short version: this case draws on the landmark US Supreme Court free speech case Citizens United, which partially revoked the odious McCain-Feingold Act, which was easily one of the most blatantly unconstitutional laws that Congress has passed in recent memory. Since CU ruled that you couldn’t muzzle a group under the cynical guise of ‘campaign finance reformed,’ the judge in the case has determined that a group may make the same kind of contributions to a specific candidate as a group that an individual can. That effectively means that, say, the AFL-CIO can give Barack Obama five grand directly next year (half for the primary, half for the general), perfectly legally*.
This will be appealed, of course: the usual suspects are already making noise about how this case violates the last Supreme Court decision-but-one on the matter. Of course, it’s the ‘but-one’ that’s the kicker…
Moe Lane
*Mind you, that particular group plans to give that particular candidate considerably more, ideally (for them) in a form that will not result in actual convictions for money-laundering. Frankly, I think that it’d be easier all around if we had less restrictions on maximum contributions and more requirements on transparency.
I’m kinda iffy on the transparency thing, too. Remember what happened with CA Prop 8? One side was publishing addresses and phone numbers (on Google Maps, to assist location) of the other side – all in an attempt (often successful) to get them fired or otherwise run out of town.
I disagree with the transparency.
We’ve already seen what Obama and his thugs will do to corporations that donated Republican in the past: no government contracts for you!
It’s not free speech if the government is free to retaliate with chilling consequences to corporations that donate to the “wrong people”. We know there is no good reason for Obama to compel corporations to disclose donations other than to politically target them for retaliation, period. We know he will do this because he’s already ripped up government contracts for non-union companies.
It is a pattern of brazen thuggery. Don’t fall for the “transparency” nonsense, Moe. You’re too smart for that.
I agree with you Moe, the more lights you put on to it, the quicker the cockroaches scurry away. Like your post above, if they are saying that I’m going to kill grandma, then there is nothing to lose. Hopefully, more people will grow a spine and stand up to them. Their numbers are quite smaller than people realize, and the petulant children will be put to bed no matter how loud they scream.