Skip to main content

Challenge: Try and find a U.S. Supreme Court ruling making super PACs legal?
More specifically find the ruling allowing unlimited private individual funds to be given to a super PAC to support a candidate for office.  

Where is this ruling people speak of?

The answer is it doesn't exist.  

Here is what does exist.

#1 Citizens United
No dispute, however, it doesn't apply to individuals.

#2 SpeechNow March 26, 2010
Big problem here.  For starters.  This was NOT the U.S. Supreme Court.  This was a ruling by United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.  

Further, most cherry pick one line and ignore the full ruling.   Here is the file for SpeechNow Ruling

The contribution limits...violate the First Amendment by preventing plaintiffs from donating to SpeechNow in excess of the limits and by prohibiting SpeechNow from accepting donations in excess of the limits.  We should be clear, however, that we only decide these questions as applied to contributions to SpeechNow, an independent expenditure–only group. Our holding does not affect, for example, § 441a(a)(3)’s limits on direct contributions to candidates.
This Court clearly kept contribution limits direct to candidates.

#3 National Organization for Marriage Ruling January 31, 2012
This ruling by another U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was appealed up to the U.S. Supreme Court and they declined the appeal.  

The ruling helped define "direct contributions to candidates".  The test has nothing to do with super PACs being independent from canidates.  The test is the reasonable person test.  The Court wants to know if a reasonable person watching the transaction between the campaign contributor and the super PAC have an understanding.

If the understanding is the money will go to help elect a specific candidates, then contributions to super PACs count as "direct contributions to candidates".

Should anyone care to read the ruling in detail and interpret the Court's meaning differently you can read the full ruling here.  NOM Ruling January 31, 2012

Conclusions:  
A. Neither Citizens United, nor SpeechNow rulings removed the individual limits for "direct contributions to candidates".
B. National Organization for Marriage clarifies how to identify a "direct contributions to candidates".

If anyone can show me different I will take you out aboard my yacht for drinks.  More on super PAC lawsuit can be read here:  Super PAC Lawsuit Introduction

Philip B. Maise
Plaintiff

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    arendt, mwm341

    Philip B. Maise Plaintiff in federal suit Maise v. Political Action Committees et. al.

    by pbmaise on Wed May 16, 2012 at 05:35:18 AM PDT

  •  first off (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mwm341, nextstep, Neuroptimalian
    Challenge: Try and find a U.S. Supreme Court ruling making super PACs legal?
    A supreme court ruling would make it constitutional, not legal. Legalizing things comes through the legislature. nitpicking there.

    More importantly, actions by citizens are presumed to be legal unless there is legislation that makes them illegal.

    There is likewise no U.S. Supreme Court ruling making steak legal? Or kite flying or kissing.

    Land of the free...

    •  Legislation making super PACs illegal (0+ / 0-)

      Congress is the one  that made the "laws" that imposed limits on individual contributions to candidates.

      See Federal Election Campaign Act.  There are a few differences between regulations, statutes, and the law.  

      For outside reading on that topic I suggest:

      This article that explains further.

      Philip B. Maise Plaintiff in federal suit Maise v. Political Action Committees et. al.

      by pbmaise on Wed May 16, 2012 at 03:44:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  ? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Neuroptimalian
    B. National Organization for Marriage outlines how to tell if contribution to super PAC really counts as if given directly.
    No, it doesn't tell us that.  It tells us that disclosure requirements - even thorough, exacting, exhaustive disclosure requirements - aren't unconstitutional.
  •  Provide proof you own a yacht. (0+ / 0-)

    Then provide proof from the Constitution that it's legal for you to own one.

    I'm betting you can't provide the first, and I'm certain you won't be able to prove the second.

    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the universe." -- Albert Einstein

    by Neuroptimalian on Wed May 16, 2012 at 02:52:04 PM PDT

    •  Being taken seriously. (0+ / 0-)

      I mention things in my writings to explain and publicize the super PAC lawsuit  to help substantiate what I am saying should be taken seriously.  

      Links
      Short video of my yacht in South China Sea
      Registration evidence

      Note: It only sleeps 14, I don't have a Sub-Zero side by side in my galley, I only have 7 tenders, it is just 40 feet wide, it doesn't have a helipad nor a swimming pool.  While the salon could fit a  7ft model B Steinway piano, the acoustics when headroom is less than 8ft don't justify it. I compromised using the same Yamaha I keep aboard another boat owned by a friend and at home.

      So please note I did not say it was a super yacht. However, it is too large for many marinas. I already confirmed it can't fit in Guam's marina near the Court house.  

      Philip B. Maise Plaintiff in federal suit Maise v. Political Action Committees et. al.

      by pbmaise on Wed May 16, 2012 at 03:34:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I would think that anyone who can afford a yacht (0+ / 0-)

        can afford to retain an attorney to properly prosecute the case you allege.

        "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the universe." -- Albert Einstein

        by Neuroptimalian on Wed May 16, 2012 at 10:03:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site