Legal Commentary

Citizens United Reargued Next Week

By Big Tent Democrat

The Constitutional Accountability Center has a post on what's at stake:

The case involves a film, Hillary: The Movie, that was produced by Citizens United, a conservative, non-profit corporation, to coincide with the 2008 presidential primary season. The case began as a fairly sleepy challenge to the Federal Election Commission’s (FEC’s) decision to treat the film’s production and release as corporate electioneering subject to campaign finance regulations, but was transformed by an order issued by the Supreme Court on June 29th. Here are five reasons why Citizens United is now a truly momentous case:

[More...]

1. President Palin, Courtesy of Chevron: Let’s start with the biggest and most obvious reason this is a momentous case. Citizens United is arguing that expenditures by corporations in elections should be treated identically to those of individuals. If the Court accepts this argument, it would do away with a distinction that has been in place in our Constitution since the Founding and our statutory law since the Tillman Act of 1907 (as explained in the brief CAC filed in Citizens United), and allow corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money in elections. [. . .]

I am not that familiar with the issues involved other than the fact that the Tillman Act has been on the books for over 100 years. A 5-4 reversal will demonstrate just how "judicially modest" conservatives like Chief Justice Roberts actually are. Which is to say, not at all.

Speaking for me only

Full post as published by TalkLeft on September 02, 2009 (boomark / email).