Monday, June 27, 2011
Public funds are not free speech but private funds are.
The Supreme Court has spoken again. The latest ruling is that public funding of candidates is not a mechanism of free speech but if you have oodles of private boodle you can say whatever you want without hindrance of that evil public money.
The vote was again 5-to-4, with the same five justices in the majority as in the Citizens United decision. The majority’s rationale was that the law violated the First Amendment rights of candidates who raise private money. Such candidates, the majority said, may be reluctant to spend money to speak if they know that it will give rise to counter-speech paid for by the government.According to the Dread Chief Justice Roberts, if a preponderance of private money is not allowed to overwhelm the voices of others not so fortunate we will never have robust and wide-open political debate. Which makes sense, in a Heritage Foundation kind of way.
“Laws like Arizona’s matching funds provision that inhibit robust and wide-open political debate without sufficient justification cannot stand,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority. Justice Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. joined the majority opinion.
Comments:
<< Home
The nation will be taken completely over by the far right next election.
Voting will be only a formality for those on the left who think they have a chance to win.
Voting will be only a formality for those on the left who think they have a chance to win.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
Post a Comment