WHERE are all the cries of judicial activism from the right?

[goldcatt]

Because what the court did was not judicial activism. We often call judicial activism legislating from the bench. That is setting new precedents that aren't law.

the court did not do that here. Had the ruling gone the other way THAT would have been judicial activism. The court simply affirmed that limiting a corporations ability to contribute money to a campaign would have been a violation of the first amendment.

Okay. then show men the law or constitutional provision that says that corporations are persons. It seems that Americans simply can't be honest about this judicial activism issue. Both sides do it. When you agree with it, you call it 'sound legal reasoning'. When you disagree, you call it judicial activism. Either way, they are rulings with no basis in law.

Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's the law of the land, Bubba.

But it's misread, and misused. since you have made the claim - repeatedly - please be kind enough to explain in detail where Santa Clara holds that corporations (or unions, etc.) are entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizenship under the 14th.

 

[uscitizen]

Corporations are taxed just like people.

The ruling is fair and balanced as it applies to all...and all will have the advantages and disadvantages of the ruling.

The ruling takes away any concern of compromising the integrity of the constitution.

I hate the ruling. I love my country. I gain from the integrity of the constitution.

I support the ruling.

I'm glad you love your country, so do I...but I always considered my country as people...I guess I was wrong.

I never knew our founder's real intent was to design the Constitution as a weapon that can harm people...again I am wrong...

Wake up my friend. Wake up.
Dont vote for those that cowtow to the special interests.

corporations are not special interests?

 

[Oldandtired]

I'm glad you love your country, so do I...but I always considered my country as people...I guess I was wrong.

I never knew our founder's real intent was to design the Constitution as a weapon that can harm people...again I am wrong...

Wake up my friend. Wake up.
Dont vote for those that cowtow to the special interests.

corporations are not special interests?

You have a reading comprehension issue I see.
Yes, I categorize them as special interests for this debate....yes.

 

[uscitizen]

Wake up my friend. Wake up.
Dont vote for those that cowtow to the special interests.

corporations are not special interests?

You have a reading comprehension issue I see.
Yes, I categorize them as special interests for this debate....yes.

sorry...

 

[Freedomlover]

Nobody on the left complained when big labor spent tens of millions of dollars for dem candidates. Now the playing field is being leveled, as it should be, since the left is anti-business. Business, under the freedom of speech amendment now can defend themselves from the attacks of the left.

By the way, did anyone on the left cry foul when Chinese operatives gave money to Clinton even though it was against the law? There was not even an investigation. So, lefties quit griping about unions no longer being the only players on the field now.

 

[goldcatt]

So all this means is that we go back to the times before the airwaves were deluged by ads from 501c's, 527's and other PACS. We've been there before and it's certainly not as if corporations had not already found ways to get around the unconstitutional provisions of McCain/Feingold. Maybe we can try campaign reform again and get it right this time.

Honestly, I hope you're right that they'll try again. McCain Feingold was a joke.

But I doubt they will. After all, the same people who make the laws are the ones benefitting from the current system. Why would they choke their own golden geese?

 

[Oddball]

But it's misread, and misused. since you have made the claim - repeatedly - please be kind enough to explain in detail where Santa Clara holds that corporations (or unions, etc.) are entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizenship under the 14th.

Not misread at all...It's merely an intended interpretation of the 14th Amendment. Corporate personhood

That decision dovetails with the passage of 16 Stat 419, in 1871, which created the corporation known as "District of Columbia".

Subsequently, under the auspices of statutory law, the feds became the be-all-end-all dispenser of "civil (as opposed to natural and/or God-given inherent) rights".

 

[Queen]

Corporations are composed of individuals who can contribute and vote.

As an aside, I'm mildly stunned to see Tea Partiers and TP sympathizers siding with the corporations on this one. (not referring to you specifically)

They always have! It was never a grass roots movement. It was an astroturf movement sponsored by FOX and health insurance companies. The Tea partiers of today were out there protesting FOR tax cuts for the rich and against Obama's plan to let the Bush tax cuts expire. The tea partiers of 230 years ago were protesting the opposite. They were against the richest of the rich getting tax cuts.

 

[Queen]

That's it. I've had it. We have now been completely sold out. This country is stupid - its leaders, policies and its people. And the now we have confirmation that the supposedly fair and blind justice system is in the pockets of corporations, ie against real persons. I think I want out now. This is not the country I thought it was...

Supreme Court Lifts Campaign Spending Limits : NPR

I'll come by and help you pack and get the hell out of the country. Where would you like to go?

To a democracy where the people have the power. The USA used to be the best in the world. This ruling puts us farther into the corporatocracy column.

 

[Queen]

Corporations are composed of individuals who can contribute and vote.

Corporations should not be classified as a "person". Profit is their only concern, and by any means necessary, and they have more money, power and voice than the rest of us combined. I have a BIG problem with this.

Anyone who believes in the fundamental principles of democracy should have a problem with this.

Apparently right wingers don't believe in the fundamental principles of democracy.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Because this is not a case of activism. This is the court saying you can't limit free speach.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

To a democracy where the people have the power. The USA used to be the best in the world. This ruling puts us farther into the corporatocracy column.

You're a fucking idiot.

 

[goldcatt]

But it's misread, and misused. since you have made the claim - repeatedly - please be kind enough to explain in detail where Santa Clara holds that corporations (or unions, etc.) are entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizenship under the 14th.

Not misread at all...It's merely an intended interpretation of the 14th Amendment. Corporate personhood

That decision dovetails with the passage of 16 Stat 419, in 1871, which created the corporation known as "District of Columbia".

Subsequently, under the auspices of statutory law, the feds became the be-all-end-all dispenser of "civil (as opposed to natural and/or God-given inherent) rights".

You keep on about the 14th, Santa Clara and the District of Columbia. Please explain first, where the 14th Amendment issues are decided in Santa Clara and second, where the incorporation of the District of Columbia (or any incorporated geographical or municipal unit, for that matter) creates citizenship rights under the 14th for corporations and unions in general. Finally, I'd love to see what one has to do with the other.

 

[Queen]

I saw no where in the constitution where money is speech.

Stop spinning.
It will get you no where and adds nothing to the debate.

Money is not speech and corporations are not persons.

The only spin is pretending they are.

 

[Oldandtired]

I saw no where in the constitution where money is speech.

Stop spinning.
It will get you no where and adds nothing to the debate.

Money is not speech and corporations are not persons.

The only spin is pretending they are.

Well, Queen. I never said money was speech and I never called coproations persons.
So exactly why did you post that?

 

[Queen]

As an aside, I'm mildly stunned to see Tea Partiers and TP sympathizers siding with the corporations on this one. (not referring to you specifically)

Ummm.. try "siding with the CONSTITUTION on this one", some us understand that the rule of law requires decisions which may not be as pragmatic as we would like them to be but are required for the continuation of that rule.

The problem is, the 14th Amendment was not written to confer personhood status on corporations. The Supreme's did not even do that, a slimy little stenographer by the name of J.C.Bancroft Davis who used to be a railroad exec slipped that in, and has been used as precedent ever since the 1800s.

THAT'S the clerk's name who started this mess. Damn him.

 

[Queen]

Stop spinning.
It will get you no where and adds nothing to the debate.

Money is not speech and corporations are not persons.

The only spin is pretending they are.

Well, Queen. I never said money was speech and I never called coproations persons.
So exactly why did you post that?

I posted it because the Supreme Court decision claims that money = speech and corporations = persons. And because you told him to stop spinning.

It's pretty easily understood. I hope this helps.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

Well, you did say you wanted out now so have at it.

I'm working on it. Unfortunately, most countries don't offer asylum from stupid...

 

[Queen]

To a democracy where the people have the power. The USA used to be the best in the world. This ruling puts us farther into the corporatocracy column.

You're a fucking idiot.

You win the debate!

You're a genius!

 

[Queen]

Because this is not a case of activism. This is the court saying you can't limit free speach.

HAHA and you call me a fucking idiot. Awesome. You don't even know how to spell speech and you think money = speech.

These are the people who are for this ruling America.

We are fucking doomed if there are enough people out there like you.