Five Terrible U.S. Supreme Court Rulings That Poisoned American Elections With Big Money

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/five-terrible-us-supreme-court-rulings-poisoned-american-elections-big-money

***SNIP

2007: Federal Election Commission (FEC) v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc.

The SCOTUS Ruling: The Court struck down a law regulating sham issue ads — television advertisements that clearly target specific candidates, but avoid regulation by posing as "issue" ads. For example, an advertisement referring to a candidate by name close to the election, but instead of explicitly advocating voting for or against the candidate, tells the viewer to “call Rep. Smith and tell him to stop corporate polluters.”

***SNIP

2008: Davis v. FEC

The SCOTUS Ruling: The Court struck down the so-called “Millionaire’s Amendment,” which had permitted congressional candidates facing wealthy opponents who spent more than $350,000 of their own money on the race to raise larger contributions until they achieved parity with their wealthy opponents.

***SNIP

2010: Citizens United v. FEC

The SCOTUS Ruling: The Court opened the door to allow unions and corporations, including for-profit corporations, to spend unlimited amounts on elections, as long as that money is not given directly to or used in coordination with a candidate.

***SNIP

2011: Arizona Free Enterprise Club v. Bennett

The SCOTUS Ruling: The Court struck down part of an Arizona program that provided public funds to candidates who agreed to only raise very small contributions from the public and to abide by campaign expenditure limits. Specifically, the program could no longer provide additional money to these candidates if they faced big-spending opponents.