Newser
GINSBURG, BREYER THINK MONTANA RULING WILL BE A CHANCE TO REVERSE DECISION
The Supreme Court has agreed to take a case that justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer say will give it a chance to rethink its infamous Citizens United v. FEC decision. The court is being asked to look into a Montana Supreme Court decision stating that its law restricting corporate election spending in state elections is fine, because it “arises from Montana history,” UPI reports. Essentially, Montana is arguing that Citizens United only applies to federal laws and elections, not state ones.
Two Montana corporations are asking the court to make a summary judgment to the contrary; their lead counsel argues that otherwise, “free speech will be seriously harmed,” because states anywhere could “ban core political speech.” But Ginsburg and Breyer earlier wrote that the case “will give the Court an opportunity to consider whether, in light of the huge sums currently deployed to buy candidates’ allegiance, Citizens United should continue to hold sway.”
Related articles
- Supreme Court Agrees to Reconsider Citizens United (newser.com)
- Citizens United sequel filed (scotusblog.com)
It would be incredible to have this overturn, or even just limited, but those conservative justices truly believe that free speech should cost money.
I think the conservative Supremes actually think they have to restrain the power of the people. The Supreme Court believes the people have the vote – so the corporation should have the power to influence that vote. After all, elections are decided by individuals pulling levers in voting booths. Corporations can not do that. So they express their interests by supporting the candidate of their choice. There IS a certain reasoning to it that is inescapable – except that it ignores human nature.
They didn’t say free speach should cost money, they said using money is a form of free speach when buying ads