On CU v. FEC

[Wry Catcher]

Retired justice says campaign finance ruling made cash king - Yahoo! News

Chief Justice Roberts must know, on some level, that the 5 to 4 ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (558 U.S. 50 (2010) would violate the spirit of our Constitution and move us further down the road to plutocratic rule.

Was that his intent? Did he know the consequences before he acted (did the five know the consequences before they acted)? Is this ruling, as it strikes to the heart of 'free elections a foolish mistake, a case of misfeasance or worse, malfeasance?

What it is not is a defense of the first amendment. Notwithstanding Romney's opinion corporations and SuperPacs are not people.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

From a political standpoint Citizens United and Roe v. Wade are very similar cases: the Court’s respective rulings attempted to protect fundamental aspects of the Constitution and its case law, with the understanding that the rulings would cause continued hardship and conflict.

The Court was not ignoring the issues addressed in both cases, and the Court was not necessarily offering any solutions. The Court simply established the doctrine that the law and Constitution couldn’t be compromised to realize otherwise worthwhile goals: the elimination of abortion in the case of Roe, and the elimination of corruption in campaign financing with regard to Citizens United.