The U.S. Supreme Court released two opinions today, but the election law case was not decided. Citizens United v FEC will be re-argued on September 9, 2009. The Court wants both sides to argue whether the Court should overrule Austin v Michigan State Chamber of Commerce and McConnell v Federal Election Commission. Austin v Michigan State Chamber of Commerce was decided in 1990 and said that the federal government may prohibit corporations from using treasury funds to support or oppose candidates in elections. McConnell v Federal Election Commission was decided in 2003 and upheld a ban on corporations using treasury funds to pay for any broadcast ad that mentions a candidate for federal office within 60 days of an election.
The MORONS can NOT detect that a corporation is a FICTIONAL private *person* with FICTIONAL powers to do certain things — mainly as a way NOT to have personal liability on the human owners – shareholders of the corporation ???
Since when does an FICTIONAL private *person* have ANY human rights — speech, press, assemble, petition ???
What’s next in this New Age of INSANE party hack Supremes — FICTIONAL corporations getting the right to vote ???
The First Amendment says, “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press”. It doesn’t say “no law abriding the freedom of speech of individuals”.
Since when does a FICTIONAL person have ANY thing to say or write — like some ancient FICTIONAL Greek god up in the clouds ???
Ask any 8 year old kid — does he/she see ANY corporations moving around or even any governments — all FICTIONAL.
How many FICTIONAL corporations around in 1789 lobbying the First Congress ???
Newspapers are generally corporations and they certainly have a lot to say.
Richard misses the point. Corporations are property, nothing more. A corporation has no more of a right to speak than does a megaphone. It is important not to confuse the right of an individual to use a megaphone to speak with the right of a megaphone to speak. It would violate the First Amendment to prohibit an individual from shouting that individual’s support for a candidate, and also if the prohibited act was to shout support for a candidate using a megaphone. But it violates no right to say “megaphones are prohibited from shouting their support for a candidate.
Corporations can only act through individuals, it is true, but they, as fictional entities, have no judgment, no conscience, no moral compass. Managers of for-profit corporations are prohibited from giving money to charity, for example, unless it is for profit-enhancing (i.e., good PR) purposes. Similarly, a corporation’s “support” for a candidate can only be because that candidate is perceived to be good for the corporate bottom line, even if damning for people.
Corporations are groups of human beings. Collective action by groups of human beings often accomplish what individuals, on their own, can’t accomplish. The ACLU is a corporation. The Libertarian Party National Committee is a corporation. There are tens of thousands of non-profit corporations.
Sooo — will the ANTI-Democracy Asian hoards in foreign *corporations* (aka front groups) be able to take over the U.S.A. via campaign finance donations ???
The mess is also partially due to the Supremes in generally screwing up personal liability in various areas — suing a newspaper reporter for libel (versus the fictional newspaper corporation employer) — suing a govt employee for a tort (versus suing the fictional government employer), etc.