Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MindMover

(5,016 posts)
Mon Jun 25, 2012, 01:03 PM Jun 2012

Supreme Court to States, Screw Off.....

In a case billed as "Citizens United II," the US Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear new arguments on the wisdom of its 2010 Citizens United decision, the court's most controversial campaign finance ruling in years. By a 5-4 vote, the court summarily reversed a decision by the Montana Supreme Court upholding that state's century-old ban on independent political spending by corporations. This deals a blow to reformers who hoped to undo or chip away at Citizens United and stem the expansion of special interest money in elections.

The case, known as American Tradition Partnership, Inc. v. Bullock, began with an act of defiance. After the Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United that bans on independent political spending by corporations were unconstitutional, 23 states stopped enforcing the bans they already had in place. Not Montana, which continued to enforce its Corrupt Practices Act, a longstanding law that banned independent corporate political spending. When American Tradition Partnership (ATP), a conservative nonprofit committed to fighting "environmental extremism," challenged the law, the state supreme court upheld it. That led ATP to petition the US Supreme Court to hear the case on appeal.

The high court faced several options with the American Tradition Partnership case. One was summary reversal—an immediate overturning of the Montana Supreme Court's ruling without hearing any new arguments. Another option was to allow new arguments on the case, which would essentially be a rearguing of part of the core logic in Citizens United—namely, that independent political expenditures "do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption."

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/06/supreme-court-citizens-united-montana?

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Supreme Court to States, Screw Off..... (Original Post) MindMover Jun 2012 OP
Repugs are all for states rights, Tommykun Jun 2012 #1
Supreme Court to we the people and our Constitution: indepat Jun 2012 #2
DUzy award material! freshwest Jun 2012 #3
I though they were states rights bigdarryl Jun 2012 #4

Tommykun

(81 posts)
1. Repugs are all for states rights,
Mon Jun 25, 2012, 01:08 PM
Jun 2012

until those states don't agree with them. Then they start crying to the US Supreme Court that they can't give millions to some dimwit corporate fascist.

indepat

(20,899 posts)
2. Supreme Court to we the people and our Constitution:
Mon Jun 25, 2012, 01:13 PM
Jun 2012

screw off and if you don't understand that basic fact, take a look at our extended middle fingers.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Supreme Court to States, ...