temetherian

on on citizens united


Given my rate of posting, I'm sure no one's holding their breath for me to weigh in on Citizens United v. FEC. It actually is the sort of thing I'd post about, since it seems likely to be a fairly dangerous ruling in light of the consequences it could have on future elections. But I think decisions like this deserve a consideration in terms of the interpretation of the Constitution, not just a quick reaction to the consequences. And I know enough about con law to know that I don't know enough about the particulars here to give a fair commentary on the interpretation. At least not until there are some more reasonably detailed summaries, because I'm not reading all 183 pages of the opinions. Hopefully SCOTUSblog delivers, because I expect the less specialized media to be more focused on the aforementioned consequences.



1 comments:

Anonymous said...

When in the best interest of the company, or in "their" best interest, do not companies already demand "equal" protection under the law? So when is an entity afforded those inalienable rights. When is suits the power to be, should we say the "powers" that are?
One disadvantage of using a "living" document as a base for our laws.




The opinions expressed on this site are my own and not neccessarily those of my employer.