Judge: Corporate donations ban unconstitutional

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Associated Press

Judge: Corporate donations ban unconstitutional
Posted 17m ago

ALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) — A judge has ruled that the campaign-finance law banning corporations from making contributions to federal candidates is unconstitutional, citing the Supreme Court's landmark Citizens United decision last year in his analysis.

In a ruling issued late Thursday, U.S. District Judge James Cacheris tossed out part of an indictment against two men accused of illegally reimbursing donors to Hillary Clinton's Senate and presidential campaigns.

Cacheris says that under the Citizens United decision, corporations enjoy the same rights as individuals to contribute to campaigns.

The ruling from the federal judge in Virginia is the first of its kind. The Citizens United case had applied only to corporate spending on campaigning by independent groups, like ads run by third parties to favor one side, not to direct contributions to the candidates themselves.



Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2011-05-27-corporate-contributions-campaigns_n.htm

[Hell Hath No Fury]

1. Man we are so fucked.

:cry:

[HillbillyBob]

2. So we change the Constitution! I mean they want to ban

gay folk from getting married which has not a godamn thing to do with their lives. Corporations seizing control of our government does affect us all.

[samrock]

7. That would require 2/3rds of the House and Senate to pass it..

LOL That will NEVER happened.. we are just soo fucked!!

[primavera]

15. Of course, nowadays...

... we need almost that level of supermajority to pass any law.

[notesdev]

3. all the rights...

none of the responsibilities or risks

what a country

[grilled onions]

4. So If Corporations Hold All the Cards

what leverage do we have as voters? How can we ever get them to listen to us if corporations buy their favors? Will voting be just a waste of time in the future?

[fascisthunter]

5. SO now COrporations are a full-person and we voters are less than

What this judge is ruling should be UNCONSTITUTIONAL. I hope this judge lives a life of misery and that goes for anyone else who thinks corporations are people too.

This is a fascist agenda!

[alp227]

6. Reagan nominated this judge n/t

[fascisthunter]

8. there you go! Another fascist activist judge widdling away at our rights as VOTERS!

we now have very little influence in our election system and this judge knows it!

[SharksBreath]

9. There is one way to fight this. Everyone should form a corporation.

Not for giving politically but for writing off taxes.

If everyone is doing it then they will put a stop to it.

[fascisthunter]

10. it's a catch 22 though

by becoming corporations we all condone this, and what gaurantee is there that they would stop it?

[joeglow3]

13. Umm, that makes no sense

How excatly would you "write off taxes" with this setup?

[boppers]

19. Uhm, yeah, a huge amount of us have been doing that for ages.

I've been a corporation for 20 years now.

[Firebrand Gary]

11. UNITED STATES FOR SALE

We offer discounted rates on State elections, depending on US congressional races, you may qualify for our 2 for 1 deal. Senate races we are offering a coupon, you contribute a $1 and we will match it by $1000.

The Citizens of which this country was founded by did not articulate, We the Corporations, of the Corporations, by the Corporations.

We no longer Govern our own country, Walmart does.

[madrchsod]

12. this is why they want to destroy the unions.

now the unions can give money directly to a candidate. the unions do not have the funds to match the corporate elite but they have a organization and feet on the ground.

[EvilMonsanto]

14. Federal Judge Rules Corporations, Just Like People, Should Be Able To Give To Candidates

Source: TPM

Last year the Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United opened up the coffers of political action groups to corporate funds because the court found that companies -- just like people -- should be able to donate to political causes. Now a federal judge has ruled that based on that logic, corporations should be able to give directly to politicians just like human beings.

Federal Judge James C. Cacheris, who was nominated to the federal bench in the Eastern District of Virginia by President Ronald Reagan back in 1981, ruled that "for better or worse, Citizens United held that there is no distinction between an individual and a corporation with respect to political speech."



Read more: http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/05/federal_judge_rules_corporations_just_like_people_should_be_able_to_give_to_candidates.php?ref=fpb

---

It's over!
We never really mattered that much but now it's official

Good Luck To All & GoodNite!

[TomCADem]

16. Judge Is A Reagan Appointee Of Course

[hughee99]

17. Yes, who ruled in favor of Clinton supporters.

I think judges should be allowed to pick and choose, at their own discretion, which supreme court rulings they will follow and which can be ignored. One of the biggest problems with the Citizen's United ruling is that it sets a precedent that can't just be ignored.

[Octafish]

18. This is how the rich Privatize Government.

It' isn't just Congress that's bought-and-paid-for. It's the Courts and the Executive, too. People in government know if they "rock the boat," they'll never land a good job in the private sector.

[plumbob]

20. Suggested for your reading pleasure:

http://www.amazon.com/Monkey-Wrench-Gang-P-S/dp/0061129763/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1306621337&sr=1-1