Court signals it may let corporations donate directly to campaigns
Not that there isn't plenty of horrifying things going on, but I saw this and wanted to highlight it, because it really will be the end of democracy as we currently understand it if they let corporations donate directly to campaigns. They already pretty much own our government, now they will own it out right.
From the NYTimes:
The Supreme Court may be about to radically change politics by striking down the longstanding rule that says corporations cannot spend directly on federal elections.
Olson said Citizen United's status as a not-for-profit corporation should have no bearing on its freedom to speak because the court has repeatedly held that corporations are like people when it comes to the First Amendment. Lawyer Floyd Abrams, a longtime First Amendment advocate, argued on behalf of McConnell.
Solicitor General Elena Kagan, making her first high court argument, and a former Solicitor General, Seth Waxman, representing McCain and Feingold, stressed the long history of federal laws that sought to rein in corporate and later union influence on elections, beginning with President Theodore Roosevelt's trust-busting push early in the 20th century.
"For over 100 years Congress has made a judgment that corporations must be subject to special rules when they participate in elections and this Court has never questioned that judgment," Kagan said.
The major issue, at least in terms of counting votes, is whether two conservatives, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, are willing to overrule the earlier decisions.
Both justices spoke at length in their Senate confirmation hearings about the importance of abiding by precedents — even if they would have voted the other way had they been involved in an earlier decision.
But on Wednesday neither displayed any reluctance to join the other three conservatives, Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Kennedy, who are on record opposing the restrictions on corporate and union spending.