O'Connor: Corporate campaign funds could affect judiciary

[usregimechange]

Retired justice Sandra Day O'Connor said last week's Supreme Court decision striking down restrictions on corporate spending in elections will energize an "arms race" in judicial elections and be a "problem for maintaining an independent judiciary."

Since leaving the court in 2006, O'Connor has campaigned against the election of state and local judges, and she said Tuesday that "increasingly expensive and negative campaigns for judicial office erode both the impartiality of the judiciary and the public perception of them."

O'Connor lent her voice to the reverberations from the decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which overturned two of the court's precedents and swept away decades of restrictions on how corporations and other special interest groups could spend their general treasuries on behalf of candidates.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/26/AR2010012603322.html

[MidwestTransplant]

1. Bush V. Gore....selling out to principals has repercussions.

[elleng]

2. Thanks. Was looking forward to hearing her reaction.

[Odin2005]

3. She should have thought about that in 2000.

[muntrv]

4. Well Sandy, ya shoulda thought of that when casting your vote in Bush vs Gore.

[marmar]

5. I'm really not interested in what she has to say anymore.

nt

[City Lights]

6. Ya think?

Thanks again, Sandy, for shoving Junior down our throats!

[tnlefty]

7. This from the woman who decided Bush vs. Gore?

Shut up Sandra, there is nothing that you can say or do that will be enough for what you helped to unfurl on this country and the world. Pffffttt.

[DarthDem]

8. Oh, I'm Glad She's So Concerned!

Sandy - - **YOU** enabled this!!!!!!! Please just shut up.