Citizen's United. It's baaack!
Our ruling elite is far from finished with destroying America's electoral system:
Most Americans last heard from conservative lawyer James Bopp six years ago when he crafted a case, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, that won the Supreme Court’s favor and helped uncork a torrent of cash — some of it secret — that continues pouring into elections.
But Bopp is back. The Terre Haute, Indiana-based attorney, who was literally laughed at by a judge when he made his first arguments in Citizens United, is now the lead lawyer in the most prominent of a series of lawsuits attempting to further destroy political contribution limits.
To be sure, there are many variables that will shape the outcomes. And lawyers on all sides of these cases agree US Supreme Court rulings are notoriously tricky to forecast, especially with the court down to eight members following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia earlier this year.
Nevertheless, those in favor of more deregulation of campaign finance, like Bopp, are looking to extend the reasoning laid out in decisions such as Citizens United and 2014’s McCutcheon v. FEC, which overturned aggregate campaign-finance limits.
Three cases from Vermont, Michigan andMontana are game changers. I won't go into a legalistic discussion unless someone cares to join the legalistic fray. Here's the big picture:
The US Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, struck down the aggregate limit, although it left limits on contributions to individual candidates and to parties in place.
But in McCutcheon, Roberts reinforced a limited definition of political corruption, defining it very much like bribery. To prove corruption, one must essential prove a quid pro quo — that money led to some specific act of corruption. The tight definition of corruption is important, because preventing corruption — or the appearance of corruption — is the only legitimate reason the court has said justifies contribution limits.
This is the full story: http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/37637-focus-the-next-citi...
Comments
The Citizens United definition of corruption
is now the official democratic party position. Otherwise they would have to admit that the presumptive one is deeply corrupt.
It's the official lega
definition now also, following the McDonnell SCOTUS decision.
Agreed.
That ruling was extremely troubling. It's now legal to accept bribes as long as no one can prove you took an official action as a result of the bribe. Sickening.
This dovetails nicely
With the News of the ruling on McDonnell . Where's my bucket? I'm going to be sick.
Now interviewing signature candidates. Apply within.
Yea! Citizens United AND McCutcheon listed in same sentence
Please always remember they BOTH need to be overturned!!!
'What we are left with is an agency mandated to ensure transparency and disclosure that is actually working to keep the public in the dark' - Ann M. Ravel, former FEC member