Amendment proposed to overturn Citizens United decision

8 thoughts on “Amendment proposed to overturn Citizens United decision”

  1. Like you, I’m not hopeful that this will get anywhere. But any effort to reduce all the misleading crap spouting from my TV is most welcome.

    BTW, I hear you guys have a blizzard on the way. 😯 I guess we’ll be having another frosty diarrhea mess on out hands in a few days… 🙁

    1. Nope, blizzard’s over. I’m debating whether to try to shovel any of it out of my driveway. I would just let it melt, but I have two trash cans out at the curb that I need to retrieve.

  2. There is much riding on the 2012 election, and this issue is unlikely to be affected in any other way than by changes to the SC’s makeup. Ironically, the election itself will probably be affected by the CU decision. The image in my head is one of circling the drain.

    1. But the SC has already ruled on this case. Changes to the SC will affect future decisions, but not this one. Even if another campaign finance case is brought, the court will rule according to existing law and precedent. Citizens United was the judicial branch checking the legislative branch with a legal ruling. Now the legislative branch needs to check the judicial with a new law. Changing the court’s makeup is a long, tedious, very uncertain way to change law (and “stacking the court” is a dirty business). Amendments are equally long and tedious to effect, but the result is certain. There’s no saving the 2012 election from the ugliness and chaos that’s going to result from Citizens United — think 2008 x 10 — but perhaps it will result eventually in Congress passing some new campaign finance laws.

      1. Yes, I know full well that it’s too late to affect spending for 2012. The point I had in mind was the long-term one you mention. A journey of a thousand miles begins with one step, right? 🙂

... and that's my two cents