The big election law news in this coming week will be about the unusual September 9 oral argument in Citizens United v Federal Election Commission. The Court doesn’t normally hold oral arguments during September. SCOTUSBLOG has a neutral post, by Lyle Denniston, explaining the case, which concerns the interaction of federal laws on campaign spending and “Hillary: The Movie.” To see it, go to www.scotusblog.com and scroll down to the September 4 entry, “Argument Preview, Corporations in Politics.”
The Supremes have been screwing up the law regarding FICTIONAL INVISIBLE *persons* since the early 1800s.
The New Age MORON party hack Supremes may may REALLY set things off in the CU case. See the 1857 Dred Scott case – one result — the horrific Civil WAR in 1861-1865. Other results – 13th, 14th and 15th Amdts.
Will FOREIGN ENEMY PUBLIC regimes and FOREIGN ENEMY private regimes (corporations, etc.) be able to *donate* UNLIMITED zillions of dollars into elections in the U.S.A. ???
For folks with some brains — Such FIP ONLY have the legal rights / powers in the *law* that create them — such as the nonliability of stockholders in ordinary business corporations — the fictional employer, fictional property owner, etc.
Bottom line – the *law* can make all sorts of restrictions on such FIP.
Different story of course for HUMAN persons — for whom the First Amdt was written — based on the EVIL actions of the King George III regime before and during the American Revolution regarding speech – press – assemble – petition by HUMAN persons.
Sorry – the 1st Amdt was NOT written in 1789 for ordinary business corporations, unions and other FIP.
There is a basic difference between legal incomes and legal outgoes for FIP — what / when / where / how the legal incomes can be spent as outgoes.
Too much for the party hack Supremes to understand ???
Corporations do not get to vote, are not a person, and are likely to be multinational. As multinational entities are they concerned with the good of the nation. Real citizens have the nation’s interests at heart not just making money. Corporations exist only to make money. Their right to make money, within the law, is protected. Corporations have PAC moneys with much more power to turn elections than I am comfortable with already.
There are thousands of non-profit corporations in the U.S.
Along with for-profit corporations, non-profit corporations and unions should also not be considered “persons”.
It’s not just about the money issue; it’s their status as persons that allows them to petition Congress, i.e., lobby.
Obviously, it’s important for all three groups I mentioned in the first sentence to have their concerns noted by Congress, but the place for them to air those concerns is in publicly broadcast/accessible committee hearings.