A storm of campaign cash on the horizon
Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSblog says that, if questions and body language were any guide, today’s U.S. Supreme Court hearing on campaign financing foretells the unleashing of cash in federal elections:
If supporters of federal curbs on political campaign spending by corporations were counting on Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., and Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., to hesitate to strike down such restrictions, they could take no comfort from the Supreme Court’s 93-minute hearing Wednesday on that historic question.
Despite the best efforts of four other Justices to argue for ruling only very narrowly, the strongest impression was that they had not convinced the two members of the Court thought to be still open to that approach. At least the immediate prospect was for a sweeping declaration of independence in politics for companies and advocacy groups formed as corporations.
The Court probed deeply into Congress’ reasoning in its decades-long attempt to restrict corporate influence in campaigns for the Presidency and Congress, in a special sitting to hear a second time the case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (08-205). At issue was whether the Court was ready to overturn two of its precedents — one from 1990, the other from 2003 — upholding such limitations….
For instant updates, follow me on Twitter.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
9 comments Add your comment
JohnD
September 9th, 2009
1:51 pm
Yes! I’m really worried that corporations and large public-interest groups (left/right/indifferent) don’t have enough influence over politicians. Its about time someone stepped up for the Big Guys!
If you want to really limit campaign finance in America, the place to start is overturing the old 1866 SC case that held that corporations were natural citizens (Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad). That’s where the trouble began. Given the cowards in Congress though (both left and right) that ain’t gonna happen.
But you can bet your death panel that Scalia, Alito, Thomans and Roberts will vote to protect corporations over individuals every single time.
Will Jones - Atlanta
September 9th, 2009
2:37 pm
Public Corporation, granted by revokable charter, is a legal fiction created to protect enterprises solely formed to serve the People: build public toll roads, canals, etc. Now the People’s sovereignty has been usurped by Corporatism, a euphemism for Fascism. The Fasces, the symbol of Rome – identified by the Founder of America, Thomas Jefferson, as “the real Anti-Christ” – is the opposite of the Individualism which defines American Exceptionalism: The People, made up of the sovereign individual citizens, ruling by Truth and Justice over the State.
It is no coincidence that it was the victorious Italian, Irish, and German Roman Catholic Civil War veterans who placed the twin Fasces on the front wall of the House of Representatives, nor that only the Roman Catholic bloc on the Supreme Court illegally voted to stop the recount in Florida to make a homosexual draft-dodger president, whose father killed Kennedy and King, and whose grandfather was Hitler’s banker. Nor it is a coincidence that the present Roman Catholic, members of the largest anti-individual, pedophile, Babylonian corporation in history, will vote to further support Fascism in America.
Keith
September 9th, 2009
2:44 pm
We need a Constitutional Amendment that only allows candidates and political parties to accept contributions from individuals… no PAC’s or corporate donations of any kind. Let’s empty out K Street.
jconservative
September 9th, 2009
3:09 pm
All of you who are concerned about money in politics – there is only one way to get it out. Never vote for an incumbent!
Will Jones - Atlanta
September 9th, 2009
3:09 pm
The gift or receipt of money by any public official or candidate for elective office must be deemed a felony. Let Truth and Justice rule with the sovereign People in America.
Annuit Coeptis
clyde
September 9th, 2009
4:09 pm
Why not limit campaign contributions to the voters?That would eliminate corporations and anyone;thing,that can’t vote.No one should have a bigger stake in an election than the people.
Yes,I know corporations provide jobs for people and we have a vested interest in their well being.
They used to call me CrazyJoe now they call me Batman!
September 9th, 2009
4:24 pm
It seems like more “Activist Judges” (republican) ruling from the bench to me…….
George
September 9th, 2009
7:54 pm
Thanks to the Supremes we will attain the best government money can buy.
I agreee–the only safe route for us little people is to constantly vote out incumbents.
That is the only way to cancel out the millions flowing through PACS and “campaign bundlers”
JAMES RAIDER
September 9th, 2009
11:42 pm
This may be one of the most important decisions made by this court. It should receive front page coverage, and cameras should be providing us with front row center seats to the drama.
http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2009/09/political-campaign-funding-democracys.html
Voting taxpayers should want to increase controls on campaign funding, not reduce them.