A peek under the robes of an increasingly partisan court
" ... just another political body"
In another 5-4 vote Monday, and without bothering to hear arguments in the case, the U.S. Supreme Court blithely tossed out a longstanding Montana law that barred corporations from making campaign contributions in state elections. States’ rights, it seems, must bow to corporate power in the Roberts court.
Or as Montana Attorney General Steve Bullock noted afterward, “It is a sad day for our democracy and for those of us who still want to believe that the United States Supreme Court is anything more than another political body.”
Bullock’s condemnation of the nation’s highest court as just “another political body” may sound harsh to some ears, but it is depressingly accurate. The Montana law had been on the books for 100 years, and for most of those 100 years its constitutionality had not been called into serious question. It was considered well within established law.
The absurd notions that have now forced its demise — corporations are people and speech is money — are novel law that has been imposed upon Montana and the rest of the country by an increasingly activist, inventive and yes, partisan Supreme Court.
Let’s be honest about this: The increasingly partisan nature of the court is not an accident. It did not occur by magic, but by concerted effort. For at least a quarter of a century, the Republican Party has made the creation of such a court one of its primary goals. The same sort of rigid ideological tests that the party has imposed on candidates for elective office have also been imposed on those it supports for nomination to the federal judiciary. Over a generation, that campaign has succeeded in creating a court that is far more friendly to the powerful than to the individual citizen.
The “smoking gun” in that evolution is of course the court’s “Citizens United” decision, in which the conservative majority decided that bans or limits on corporate expenditures are unconstitutional because “independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption.”
That finding is ludicrous for a variety of reasons. It contradicts common sense, it contradicts history, it contradicts what we can see taking place in plain sight at this very moment and it contradicts the elected politicians who passed campaign-finance laws in the first place. Unlike the unelected justices, those politicians know the system intimately; they know firsthand what power can be wielded by unlimited money spent anonymously.
The people of Montana know it as well. I would strongly advise those interested in the issue to read last year’s 5-2 decision of the Montana Supreme Court (available here) as it attempted to uphold and defend their state’s law against the conservative judicial majority in Washington. The decision lays out in clear language that state’s difficult history in trying to fend off outside corporate control.
It’s also important to note that neither of the two dissenters on the Montana court embraced the logic of the Citizens’ United decision. Instead, they based their dissent on the fact that Montana had no choice but to bow to the federal court’s greater authority, however irrational it might be.
One of those dissenters, Justice James C. Nelson, used the opportunity to express his clear and eloquent disgust with the decision of his federal counterparts. I cannot recommend it more highly.
Here’s part of what he had to say:
“For starters, the notion that corporations are disadvantaged in the political realm is unbelievable. Indeed, it has astounded most Americans. The truth is that corporations wield inordinate power in Congress and in state legislatures. It is hard to tell where government ends and corporate America begins; the transition is seamless and overlapping.
In my view, Citizens United has turned the First Amendment’s “open marketplace” of ideas into an auction house for Friedmanian corporatists. Freedom of speech is now synonymous with freedom to spend. Speech equals money; money equals democracy. This decidedly was not the view of the constitutional founders, who favored the preeminence of individual interests over those of big business.
Furthermore, it defies reality to suggest that millions of dollars in slick television and Internet ads — put out by entities whose purpose and expertise, in the first place, is to persuade people to buy what’s being sold—carry the same weight as the fliers of citizen candidates and the letters to the editor of John and Mary Public. It is utter nonsense to think that ordinary citizens or candidates can spend enough to place their experience, wisdom, and views before the voters and keep pace with the virtually unlimited spending capability of corporations to place corporate views before the electorate….
I absolutely do not agree that corporate money in the form of “independent expenditures” expressly advocating the election or defeat of candidates cannot give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption. Of course it can. Even the most cursory review of decades of partisan campaigns and elections, whether state or federal, demonstrates this. Citizens United held that the only sufficiently important governmental interest in preventing corruption or the appearance of corruption is one that is limited to quid pro quo corruption. This is simply smoke and mirrors. In the real world of politics, the “quid pro quo” of both direct contributions to candidates and independent expenditures on their behalf is loyalty. And, in practical effect, experience teaches that money corrupts, and enough of it corrupts absolutely.
I cannot agree with the holding that the prevention of corruption in the form of independent expenditures is not a compelling state interest. There is no plausible reason why a state would not want to protect the integrity of its election process against corruption and undue influence; to do otherwise would render the fundamental right to vote a meaningless exercise….
Lastly, I am compelled to say something about corporate “personhood.” While I recognize that this doctrine is firmly entrenched in the law, I find the entire concept offensive. Corporations are artificial creatures of law. As such, they should enjoy only those powers — not constitutional rights, but legislatively conferred powers — that are concomitant with their legitimate function, that being limited-liability investment vehicles for business.
Corporations are not persons. Human beings are persons, and it is an affront to the inviolable dignity of our species that courts have created a legal fiction which forces people — human beings — to share fundamental, natural rights with soulless creations of government. Worse still, while corporations and human beings share many of the same rights under the law, they clearly are not bound equally to the same codes of good conduct, decency, and morality, and they are not held equally accountable for their sins. Indeed, it is truly ironic that the death penalty and hell are reserved only to natural persons.”
President Obama, name that man to the U.S. Supreme Court.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
1,368 comments Add your comment
getalife
June 26th, 2012
6:05 pm
mr,
Show me the papers.
The cons ODS is off the charts.
You will end up like reagan from that stress..
F. Sinkwich
June 26th, 2012
6:06 pm
“WASHINGTON — The list of Democrats skipping the party’s upcoming national convention in Charlotte, N.C., grew Tuesday, with Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) confirming that she will not attend the convention in favor of spending time with voters.”
Can I have her ticket?
I’ll dress up like an Occutard and fit right in. I won’t even need to pack pants.
getalife
June 26th, 2012
6:06 pm
Quick, hide the ilk.
JamVet
June 26th, 2012
6:07 pm
The only accomplishment I could find for Rubio was his speaking in front of that awful, American-hating CPAC group of thugs.
Great…
josef
June 26th, 2012
6:10 pm
getalife
@ 6:06
getalife
June 26th, 2012
6:11 pm
ilky,
It is election time so they campaign in their states ilky.
td
June 26th, 2012
6:12 pm
tireofit
June 26th, 2012
6:03 pm
“When Romney going to tell us what he believes?”
Besides the comment I heard to Joe the plumber, all I heard from Obama for 18 months was “Hope and Change’ and how bad Bush was doing. No different here, besides this election is not about Romney but is a referendum on Obama. The people will choose if he deserves another term or not. Bill Clinton has already said that Romney holds the qualifications to become President and that is the only question needed to be answered for Romney. .
Jm-pass TSPLOST silly people
June 26th, 2012
6:13 pm
Sinkwich
At this rate, there won’t be a convention
They’re $17mm short of cash
They had to cancel one day due to lack of funds
Now several democrat leaders don’t plan to attend
And my favorite: the chairman of the convention held a fundraiser for Romney
Everyone is ditching O
td
June 26th, 2012
6:14 pm
JamVet
June 26th, 2012
6:07 pm
The only accomplishment I could find for Rubio was his speaking in front of that awful, American-hating CPAC group of thugs.
Great…
And what was Obama’s accomplishments before being elected President?
JamVet
June 26th, 2012
6:16 pm
td, you don’t debate, you dance.
Like Elaine on Seinfeld.
Go ahead, big red herring dog. List Rubio’s “accomplishments”.
Considering that he apparently has absolutely zero, it shouldn’t take you long!
LOL (at you)…
F. Sinkwich
June 26th, 2012
6:17 pm
“…American-hating CPAC group of thugs.”
Perhaps, Jammie, you could provide a link substantiating your outrageous allegation.
CPAC loves America.
Thugs are ACORNers, Occutards, SEIU losers, and by in large O’bozo supporters.
pogo
June 26th, 2012
6:18 pm
Much has been made about Obama and the Latino vote. There is one huge drawback here; he is losing votes in those all important Northeastern states that are packed with legal Americans that have worked and paid taxes and have paid into medicare their entire lives who now can’t find jobs. There aren’t enough latino votes to offset what he is losing with legal Americans. Obama was so stupid as to believe that his union base would agree with his kowtowing to illegal immigrants. A very bad mistake.
Jm-pass TSPLOST silly people
June 26th, 2012
6:19 pm
Jamvet you’re just a clown, and an ineffective one at that
Sad soul, you
getalife
June 26th, 2012
6:19 pm
I challenge you cons to find planet kolob and a store that sells magic underwear.
Jm-pass TSPLOST silly people
June 26th, 2012
6:21 pm
Td ignore jamvet
He has nothing to say (of substance)
tireofit
June 26th, 2012
6:22 pm
td: you need to get rid of that analog TV.
josef
June 26th, 2012
6:22 pm
POGO
Say what you will, at least middle America knows where Obama stands on illegal immigration. If they are voting on just that issue, or if it’s a key factor in casting their votes, do you honestly think that NO platform is more of a draw than one they disagree with?
Jm-pass TSPLOST silly people
June 26th, 2012
6:25 pm
40 months of 8% unemployment
“the private sector is doing fine”
Out of touch Obama
They BOTH suck
June 26th, 2012
6:26 pm
pogo
In all your STUPIDITY and IGNORANCE, can you prove how many illegal Latino’s voted in the 08 and 10 elections.
No you can so STFU already…….
damn you are dumb
If I get banned it was worth it
F. Sinkwich
June 26th, 2012
6:26 pm
“Say what you will, at least middle America knows where Obama stands on illegal immigration.”
Yeah, he’s for it.
America ain’t.
They BOTH suck
June 26th, 2012
6:26 pm
can’t
td
June 26th, 2012
6:26 pm
Jm-pass TSPLOST silly people
June 26th, 2012
6:21 pm
Td ignore jamvet
He has nothing to say (of substance)
Oh I understand. I have seen his post for a while now and can only say bless his little heart.
Tommy Maddox
June 26th, 2012
6:28 pm
After arguing before SCOTUS, the winners cheer and the losers complain. It’s been that way for a couple hundred years and it is not going to change.
getalife
June 26th, 2012
6:28 pm
willard is the outsourcer of jobs and offshore his accounts.
Nothing American about willard.
josef
June 26th, 2012
6:28 pm
SINKWICH
So, what’s Romney’s plan?
They BOTH suck
June 26th, 2012
6:28 pm
josef
I know you are a better man than I was, however Pogo’s response from me was what pogo was needing………..maybe not wanting, but surely needing
I can only hope that is his blogging persona and there really is a brain there
Jm-pass TSPLOST silly people
June 26th, 2012
6:30 pm
Jay has invented the “plantation con theory”
I bet he and sooth are pals
F. Sinkwich
June 26th, 2012
6:33 pm
“SINKWICH
So, what’s Romney’s plan?”
For immigration?
Sure. Uphold the law.
josef
June 26th, 2012
6:35 pm
BOTH
Pogo does occasionally challenge himself…not often, but he has done it. He’s just, like a lot of the posters here, so constrained by his partisanship that he leaps before he looks.
They BOTH suck
June 26th, 2012
6:35 pm
Sinkwich
So how much of an increase in the budget are you willing to accept so Romney can uphold all the laws in relation to illegals and get them rounded up and deported?
tireofit
June 26th, 2012
6:36 pm
America ain’t. So how do you feel about Reagan and amnesty?
td
June 26th, 2012
6:36 pm
getalife
June 26th, 2012
6:28 pm
willard is the outsourcer of jobs and offshore his accounts.
Nothing American about willard.
You posted this on another blog and my answer is the same. Since Romney understands (unlike Obama) what it would take to keep jobs in this country then we should let him implement those policies here to get the jobs back. Remind us all again how many jobs Obama has created since elected?
Jm-pass TSPLOST silly people
June 26th, 2012
6:37 pm
Tupelo honey on a ham sammy
Impossible to beat
josef
June 26th, 2012
6:38 pm
SINKWICH
The his plan is to follow the Supremes decision.
JM
The Imam a pal of Sooth’s? A lot more than you might think…
They BOTH suck
June 26th, 2012
6:38 pm
“not often, but he has done it”
Must be on the days when cable, internet and radio are out. Without bs talking points, at least his blogging persona, isn’t much else. Since you have been here much longer than I…… I will take your word for it
F. Sinkwich
June 26th, 2012
6:38 pm
“Washington – Confidence among U.S. consumers dropped in June for a fourth consecutive month as mounting concern over jobs and incomes dimmed the outlook for spending. The Conference Board’s sentiment index fell to 62, a five- month low…”
Anyone who still supports O’bozo has to be a complete, total, and insufferable IDIOT.
josef
June 26th, 2012
6:41 pm
BOTH
Like I said, few and far between…
SINKWICH
“… a complete, total, and insufferable IDIOT.”
Ilk knows ilk.
Tom Middleton
June 26th, 2012
6:42 pm
Testing
Tom Middleton
June 26th, 2012
6:45 pm
First, they came for the laws protecting us and we did nothing!
Tom Middleton
June 26th, 2012
6:47 pm
First they came for our election laws and we did nothing…
Jm-pass TSPLOST silly people
June 26th, 2012
6:48 pm
Tbs 6:26
Dekalb comments
June 26th, 2012
6:51 pm
bman @ 4:09
I stand corrected on your post. I do find it difficult to understand when people complain that 50% of potential taxpayers (i.e. those with some kind of income stream) don’t pay any state or federal INCOME taxes but don’t seem bothered when the ultra-rich such as RMoney pay less in taxes than their secretary and when corporations with BILLIONS in profits not only don’t pay any taxes but get corporate welfare from the U.S. taxpayers in the form of subsidies and/or tax giveaways.
Those individual taxpayers that don’t pay federal or state INCOME tax are paying federal and state taxes. They are paying Social Security and Medicare taxes. They are paying state and local sales taxes, excise taxes, etc. The calculus on whether they pay income tax is based on their total gross income against a calculus of the poverty level. They are paying a much higher percentage of their income in taxes than the ultra-rich, any corporation or the majority of other Americans.
Towncrier
June 26th, 2012
6:51 pm
“I’m still waiting on an explanation on how porn adversely affects us all.. It’s a legitimate business that generates billions yearly, it’s not mandatory that anyone watch or participate, what’s the downside?”
Sorry…was away for a while. Dude, if you can’t figure out how pornography could possibly adversely affect people in general, then you are not as smart as you might suppose or willfully blind (which I suspect). Let me give you a clue: marital relations for one (and by extension, whole families and by extension, society when broken homes lead to societal problems). How about young kids who are exposed to it deliberately or mistakenly? How about the women who are sexually abused as children being the ones by far most likely to get into the porn industry (as opposed to a more positive line of work) – do you condone the exploitation of such people?
It really has no redeeming value but appeals mainly to prurient interests (yeah, I know, you read or watch it for the interviews). Guys like you amaze me, because you want to cling to the baseless idea that human acts occur in a vacuum, which even the slightest philosophical consideration would show it false. Almost everything we do or say has ramifications for others.
They BOTH suck
June 26th, 2012
6:56 pm
Jm
I was just telling Bro this morning, it isn’t just what people post on here, but that some of them actually believe it.
I surely wouldn’t say the majority, but we have a few from all political stripes that I can only hope that what they post is for impact and attention.
After all it is politics, so we are going to have some degree of differences, but some of these people are WAY OUT there….. I would say it is more than politics. This being a political blog, so it manifest itself through that prism when they are on here.
tireofit
June 26th, 2012
6:58 pm
Why did outsourcing start under Reagan? I worked in a fortune 100 company in the 80’s and guess what they started doing? We had to teach them.
Republicans and $ = no job for most Americans.
The Gov has no Money!
June 26th, 2012
7:00 pm
I’ll say it again. Let’s just divide the country. Republicans get one half and Dems the other. Dems get to choose which part they want. Give it five years and see which side looks better. Dems are never for the plan. Repubs would jump at it. What does that tell you?
tireofit
June 26th, 2012
7:01 pm
The President when to the Varsity today. That’s an American.
tireofit
June 26th, 2012
7:03 pm
went, sorry I am busy writing special pace maker software for republicans.
Bummer
June 26th, 2012
7:04 pm
Tbs 6:56 agreed
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
June 26th, 2012
7:05 pm
Adam:
“What the hell kind of logical backflips and cognitive dissonance rattles around in your head to come up with the people who WROTE THE CONSTITUTION “just have an opinion.”
Point #1: Jefferson had nothing to do with drafting the Constitution. He was Ambassador to France at the time.
Point #2 The founding fathers were wise enough to draft a Constitution that would ignore their future opinions …………. most of whom felt that slavery was Contitutional.
Towncrier
June 26th, 2012
7:05 pm
“Republicans get one half and Dems the other. Dems get to choose which part they want. Give it five years and see which side looks better.”
This is exactly why I am a proponent of state rights with respect to things like gay marriage, abortions of convenience, legalized use of now illicit drugs, and the like. As one very wise person has said: “wisdom is proved right by her children” (with the opposite being true as well, I suppose).
josef
June 26th, 2012
7:08 pm
CRIER
Gay marriage as a state issue (or any marriage for that matter), survivor’s benefits are federal…and that’s an issue….
Bummer
June 26th, 2012
7:10 pm
Josef
Jay and sooth? Scary
kayaker 71
June 26th, 2012
7:12 pm
Clare McCaskill, that stalward Bozo supporter who endorsed Bozo even before the had the nomination, supported the shovel ready stimulus bill, was positive on Cash for Clunkers, promoted Bozocare, Dodd Frank, a second stimulus…. everything that Bozo endorsed, there was old Clare, beating the drums for Bozo. Now she is not going to the convention because she is up for re-election and she can’t take the chance of those Missouri voters seeing her cheer the Imaculated One before a national audience. She is just the first of a group of high profile limousine liberals whose political future is in doubt who don’t want anything to do with Bozo or he re-election. Lets see who else defects from the Bozo show.
Jm- bummer
June 26th, 2012
7:13 pm
Oops
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
June 26th, 2012
7:14 pm
Headline: “Former U.S. president Jimmy Carter is accusing the current president Obama of sanctioning the “widespread abuse of human rights” by authorizing drone strikes to kill suspected terrorists.”
O.K. now ………… other than JamVet ………. how many feel that the above statement (whether it’s true or not) is “disrespectful” to the current President of the United States because it accuses him of a very serious offense ?
Jm
June 26th, 2012
7:14 pm
Kayaker
Democrats going down
Poor job performance
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
June 26th, 2012
7:16 pm
Romney/Redneck 2012.
I want to wait to see what the polls say before I decide. Last time I run for anything, one of you jokers sent me a plug nickle and the rest never sent a penny. There’s somebody on this blog that knows what I’m talking about.
I’m with Romney. I’ll tell the folks I want to lead them and then wait to see which way they go and then jump ahead of them. Have a good night everybody.
Jm
June 26th, 2012
7:16 pm
Scout
I think the line from carter is a bit absurd
Dekalb comments
June 26th, 2012
7:18 pm
The gov has no money @ 7:00 p.m.
Yes, let’s see. Of the 32 states that receive more from the federal government than they pay in to the federal government, 27 are considered to be Republican states. Of the remaining states that pay more into the federal government that receive, 78% are considered Democratic states.
So let’s see, Democratic states contribute more than Republicans. Republicans = welfare, lazy, crack whores, etc. Democrats = hard-working, productive, values.
Towncrier
June 26th, 2012
7:22 pm
“Gay marriage as a state issue (or any marriage for that matter), survivor’s benefits are federal…and that’s an issue….”
They don’t have to be linked, josef, just because they automatically are now. When I go to McDonalds, I can get a happy meal or just the drink
josef
June 26th, 2012
7:25 pm
CRIER
But, they are…
http://www.npr.org/2012/04/04/149845021/must-the-federal-government-honor-gay-marriage
Believer
June 26th, 2012
7:29 pm
Obama is the one who can fix America
OedipusTax
June 26th, 2012
7:32 pm
Socialized medicine is extremist, close to a communist concept, very far to the left. Because Obamacare, supported by the extreme leftist Obama, is about to be declared unconstitutional, leftist columnist twits such as Jay Bookman has to write and make a fool out of himself. Somehow he calls a 5-4 split court that tends towards moderate conservatism to be partisan. Only the mediocre leftist fools believe this nonsense, but put Jay Bookman at the front of that class of dunces.
Dekalb comments
June 26th, 2012
7:33 pm
Towncrier @ 7:22
Laws regarding marriage has long been within the jurisdiction of each state. One state such as Georgia considers first cousin relationship to be within the permitted degree of consanguinity whereas other states prohibit this marriage.
Under what conditions a state will license a marriage and, conversely, un-do a marriage via divorce, is a matter of state law, subject to certain non-discriminatory provisions.
The issue comes in when, for heterosexual marriage, under “full faith and credit”, all states are required to recognize marriages (and divorces) performed in other states. Under DOMA and state constitutional amendments prohibiting gay marriage (which will be undone in the next 20 years if not sooner), we have a new situation. One state issues gay marriages, couple moves to a state that doesn’t recognize gay marriage. Couple cannot get divorced in new state and they no longer qualify under residency requirements to be divorced in the state in which they were married.
This creates total chaos. Then enters the issue of survivor benefits for federal programs such as Social Security. Under DOMA, the federal government may not recognize the marriage for purposes of federal benefits accrued to heterosexual couples.
The distinctions in terms of fairness and logic are clear. The question is whether your local Baptist minister is smart enough to understand. I’m not singling out Baptists here, only saying that in many states that have prohibited gay marriage, Baptists are a powerful political force that have opposed such recognition.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
June 26th, 2012
7:33 pm
Jm:
It’s absurd (and untrue) but I’m trying to make a bigger point.
Stay tuned …………….
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
June 26th, 2012
7:35 pm
Headline: “Federal agents, Arizona officials blast Homeland Security’s ‘business as usual’ approach in wake of Supreme Court ruling”
“Anyone that is determined to be a low-level threat is subject to being released back into the general population since ICE does not view them as criminals,” one DHS agent told FoxNews.com. “It saddened me to see that ICE is choosing to operate under a ‘business as usual’ mind set rather than seeing how they can work with Arizona to accomplish the goals that they both share.
The agent who talked to FoxNews.com said his colleagues are as outraged as he is and that federal policy makes it impossible to catch illegal immigrants who are criminals, unless they are caught in the act.”
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/26/business-as-usual-for-homeland-security-after-supreme-court-ruling-in-arizona/#ixzz1ywgCM7fl
Dekalb comments
June 26th, 2012
7:35 pm
Oedipus tax @ 7:32
So have you spoken with the justices on their upcoming decision? This would be a first. You should write a book. I’m not sure anyone before has been so certain of a decision from the court.
Please explain how the ACA is socialist. You seem convinced it is socialist but I submit you probably have no idea what the word means. I am looking forward to your explanation…Tic-toc, tic-toc.
Proud to be me
June 26th, 2012
7:37 pm
Jay, put you big boy pants on and stop whinning!! You are as partisan as it comes.
The Gov has no Money!
June 26th, 2012
7:39 pm
@ Dekalb
So you are for splitting the country?? Do you think the Dem side would be better? You never gave an answer. I am willing to try it, but I doubt the Dems will take the chance. You quote stats. There are lies, darn lies, and then stats. There is always more to the story than a simple set of numbers.
Doggone/GA
June 26th, 2012
7:40 pm
“Jay, put you big boy pants on and stop whinning!! You are as partisan as it comes.”
Whines Proud to be me
josef
June 26th, 2012
7:40 pm
CRIER
Not to go into it here, but as per our earlier exchange and getting back with you on what you posted, I’ll let this person speak for me and why so many of us are still angry…
http://www.queerty.com/ron-reagan-jr-explained-that-whole-aids-thing-to-his-father-20110207/
Dekalb comments
June 26th, 2012
7:41 pm
@ Proud to be whatever 7:37
And this is news to you that needs to be communicated? I thought the whole idea of “baby-face Wingfield vs. Bookman was to provide a conservative versus liberal viewpoint exchange on issues.
Do you deny “baby-face” Wingfield is not partisan? If you do I suggest you take a few steps back and assess.
Jm
June 26th, 2012
7:46 pm
Wingfield is partisan
Possibly less so, but I don’t read him enough to know for sure
Normal, Human Rights Thug...and liking it!
June 26th, 2012
7:46 pm
Read this…
The Nation Magazine
Dear Friend,
Last October, a reporter approached The Nation Institute’s Investigative Fund with disturbing cell phone video he had obtained. That grainy footage captured a handcuffed man, prone on the ground, being tased and beaten to death by US Border Patrol agents.
The victim was Anastasio Hernandez Rojas, a San Diego construction worker, father of five, and undocumented immigrant. Local police ruled his 2010 death a homicide, but then closed their investigation with no agents charged. Earlier this month, the impunity came to an end—with 16 members of Congress demanding a full investigation by the Department of Justice.
It was The Investigative Fund that made the difference. We sent the reporter, John Carlos Frey, to the border to investigate Anastasio’s death, and we met with producers at the PBS show Need to Know. The result was an April 20 broadcast that sparked a massive national petition drive and an explosion of activism by community groups such as the Southern Border Communities Coalition. Anastasio’s mother even flew to Washington, DC, to demand accountability.
We need your help so that we can keep changing the world through our reporting. Until July 4, every dollar you donate gets doubled. Thanks to a few generous donors, we have a matching fund that turns your $25 into $50 for us, your $50 into $100, your $500 into $1,000. So please donate now!
Every year, The Nation Institute’s Investigative Fund produces dozens of hard-hitting investigations like this one. Our joint probe with The Nation into racial violence in the wake of Hurricane Katrina triggered federal indictments—as did our investigation with Mother Jones into human trafficking by a Los Angeles labor recruiting firm, Global Horizons. Our investigation with In These Times into corruption by food service giant Sodexo led to a $20 million legal settlement with the New York State Attorney General. We work with journalists as they do muckraking reporting and cover the costs of their travel; then we partner with independent magazines, NPR and PBS, and online outlets to publish their investigations. As Reuter’s columnist Felix Salmon wrote, “If you want to make a difference by funding investigative journalism, you’ll get more bang for your buck by giving money to the Investigative Fund at the Nation Institute.”
But we can’t do this important work without your support. That’s why we’re asking you to donate today.
Since the Need to Know segment aired, John’s reporting has gone viral: He published an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times and the story was covered in outlets ranging from ABC News and MSNBC to Univision, the Spanish-language newspaper La Opinion, and the London Daily Mail. Now The Investigative Fund is working with John to expose more troubling deaths at the border.
We hope you’ll support groundbreaking journalism by donating to The Investigative Fund today.
Many thanks,
Esther Kaplan, Editor
The Investigative Fund
At The Nation Institute
Dekalb comments
June 26th, 2012
7:48 pm
@ The Gov has no money @ 7:39
No, I am not suggesting dividing the country. That was tried once by certain states south of the Mason-Dixon line and it didn’t go so well for them.
The point is there are lots of statistics that confirm that blue or blue-leaning states contribute more in federal revenue than red or red-leaning states. I’m not saying that is necessarily a bad thing. I’m suggesting it is an interesting fact when so many in the red or red-leaning states think they are over-taxed.
The problem we face today is liberal (and I wear that label proudly) and conservative are incapable of coming together for the “general welfare” expressed in the preamble to the Constitution. Partisan, extreme positions on both sides have made compromise and genuine “politics” impossible.
Is there hope? I don’t see much on the horizon. Whether Obama or RMoney win in November, the other side will do everything to prevent any progress. Senator McConnell’s statement…”my primary job now is to deny Obama a 2nd term” will live in infamy. Democrats will rally around that as a badge of honor.
To what end? Is our country not more important than political wins? There will always be a back-and-forth. But some, especially in the R party, believe in scorched earth. A bit childish and destructive but who cares as long as they make lots of money.
I remind them of Jesus’ statement that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than to enter heaven.
Mama Says
June 26th, 2012
7:56 pm
So now Jay is a states rights man huh ?
Interesting, when do we see the Jay is a redneck, Jay is a racist, Jay is this Jay is that stuff that comes when a conservative utters the words, States Rights.
Jm
June 26th, 2012
7:56 pm
Dekalb
Counting states is a silly metric, try population or congressional districts or something else
GA is neutral
Jm
June 26th, 2012
8:00 pm
Normal
Posting fundraising info for a possibly suspect non profit? Do your due diligence folks
Mama Says
June 26th, 2012
8:00 pm
Dekalb your comments are interesting also.
You arue for compromise yet the only cite you post is degrading to republicans.
I agree with your over all logic but this partisan stuff is well entrenched on both sides. We McConnell you have Reid.
They both do the very best they can at preventing compromise.
Mama Says
June 26th, 2012
8:03 pm
Jay can I solicit money for the republican party on This blog or what ?
How about the sons of confederate veterans ?
Ok how about my beer fund ?
They BOTH suck
June 26th, 2012
8:03 pm
Mama says
Well McConnell and Reid announced a compromise on the student loan issue, we will see what the House has to say.
But to your overall point, I agree, neither has a monopoly on divisiveness.
Dekalb comments
June 26th, 2012
8:07 pm
Jm @ 7:56
No, counting states is not silly. It is a general characterization that states that tend to lean one way or another contribute more than those that lean another way is relevant.
Georgia is slightly positive (i.e. about 2% more in than out).
But the reality is residents of states that think they are over-taxed and don’t get anything in return actually, factually, are uninformed.
Southern states often benefit from the presence of military installations. So if we cut the military budget, the pain will flow disproportionally to those states.
Mighty Righty
June 26th, 2012
8:08 pm
Qutoted from an article appearing in the Washington Post attributed to Norman Podhoretz.
And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.
What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama’s oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people – conservatives included – ought now to be deeply embarrassed.
The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of cliches, and that’s when he has his teleprompter in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all.
Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth – it’s all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.
And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence.
But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?
In short: our president is a small and small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job.
When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.
Recon 0311 2533
June 26th, 2012
8:09 pm
0311/8541,
Jimmy Carter is nothing but a sanctimonious ass who will pass his crown as the least effective United States president to Barack Obama who with any luck will be unemployed by January 013.
josef
June 26th, 2012
8:09 pm
MAMA
“How about the sons of confederate veterans ?”
Ssshhhh…don’t mention them. It’ll get you a fatwah from the Imam in a minute…speaking from past experience…
Light at the end of the tunnel...
June 26th, 2012
8:11 pm
“If ObamaCare is not deemed constitutional, then the first three and a half years of this president’s term will have been wasted on something that has not helped the American people,” he [Romney] said in a campaign stop in Virginia.
“If it is deemed to stand, then I’ll tell you one thing. Then we’ll have to have a president – and I’m that one – that’s going to get rid of ObamaCare. We’re gonna stop it on day one.”
From: June 26, 2012 10:56 pm
Obama warns on healthcare ruling
By Stephanie Kirchgaessner in Washington
Brosephus™
June 26th, 2012
8:11 pm
They BOTH @ 6:56
I sincerely hope that most of the people that I think you’re referring to do not believe what they post. If so, this country is truly messed up.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
June 26th, 2012
8:14 pm
Recon 0311 2533 :
Careful ……….. you’ll upset JamVet ……………….
Brosephus™
June 26th, 2012
8:16 pm
Obama is the one who can fix America
Nope. Only America can fix America.
Recon 0311 2533
June 26th, 2012
8:19 pm
Gay pride day in the Pentagon…unbelievable that the United States military the defenders of our national security along with millions of veterans many who’ve suffered life changing wounds not to mention those who made the ultimate sacrifice would be subjected to this political abomination. There is no doubt that Barack Obama and his disgusting administration must be terminated in November of this year.
Jay
June 26th, 2012
8:21 pm
Did someone mention Sons Of Confederate Veterans? My spidey sense was going off.
josef
June 26th, 2012
8:23 pm
IMAM
Recon 0311 2533
June 26th, 2012
8:24 pm
“Careful ……….. you’ll upset JamVet”
0311/8541@8:14
I think you know that while I’m not on this blog to upset anyone personally, should that happen, I have no remorse.
stands for decibels
June 26th, 2012
8:25 pm
evenin’.
I’ve had some weird supposed-to-be insults tossed my way online in the past, but this one:
he’s riding his scooter to work at Trader Joe’s…
I’m still trying to figure out what’s wrong, or shameful, or whatever, with a) riding a scooter to work, or b) working at Trader Joe’s.
Not that either happens to be true for me, but… I don’t get it. Maybe someone can explain.
Doggone/GA
June 26th, 2012
8:26 pm
“Gay pride day in the Pentagon…unbelievable that the United States military the defenders of our national security”
It’s very telling that you think that celebrating one segment of our soldiers is demeaning to the others. Personally, I think it’s great. I just wonder when they’re going to have a Women’s pride day in the Pentagon.
Dekalb comments
June 26th, 2012
8:27 pm
Recon @ 8:19
What? You don’t think that the service of thousands of gay, lesbian and transgendered Americans should be recognized because you consider this an abomination? I suggested you reserve your hatred for your confessional. I think your spiritual advisor will be very interested in your targeted hatred.
We are finally recognizing there are Americans that are willing to sacrifice their lives for this country. Those individuals are gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgendered. Their service is no less honorable than that of cranky white guys or blacks or asians or native americans. They have offered their service to this country and you deny them the right to recognition?
You are a communist, a socialist, an America-hater. How can you be so small unless your preacher told you to hate. Good luck on judgment day!!!
Brosephus™
June 26th, 2012
8:28 pm
“If it is deemed to stand, then I’ll tell you one thing. Then we’ll have to have a president – and I’m that one – that’s going to get rid of ObamaCare. We’re gonna stop it on day one.”
Romney can’t do that. That would be hypocrisy of epic proportions especially considering how at least one poster on this thread has said that Obama needs to be impeached for not following law. If that law is upheld, Romney will do what conservatives have been crying about, and he will enforce the law as it is. Otherwise, those very people complaining about not enforcing laws will forever be branded for the partisaned hypocrites they really are.
Recon 0311 2533
June 26th, 2012
8:30 pm
“Women’s pride day in the Pentagon.”
That would have my complete support.
josef
June 26th, 2012
8:30 pm
IMAM
I’ll put you in for honorary membership in the Patrick Cleburne camp…
“Cleburne’s relationship with his twenty-two year old adjutant, Captain Irving Ashby Buck, drew the notice of the general’s colleagues. Cleburne’s biographer John Francis Maguire wrote that the general’s ‘attachment’ to Buck ‘was a very strong one’ and that Buck ‘for nearly two years of the war, shared Cleburne’s labors during the day and his blankets at night.’ Buck himself wrote that the pair were ‘close and confidential. I habitually messed with him and shared his tent and often his blankets.”