Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 16, 2024, 03:08:55 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Constitution and Law (Moderator: Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.)
  Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission  (Read 6406 times)
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


« on: January 22, 2010, 06:07:08 AM »

Giant businesses will use their legislative power to get even more authority -- including perhaps the "right" to form militias that use deadly force on strikers. After all, workers have the duty to work 70-80 hour workweeks for the bare essence of survival, right?  Such will be the decision of tycoons and executives when they have nothing to fear from democratic opposition.  And if you think that small business will be a viable option, then think again; giant corporations will push legislation that destroys such competition. 

This decision will not cause the immediate cessation of democracy in America, but it could bring about its effective end as early as November. The House and Senate could end up with enough seats filled with enough myrmidons in the Reichstag or Supreme SovietCongress even to impeach in turn Barack Obama and Joseph Biden for strictly-political grounds.

And you're sure you don't have any mental problems?
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2010, 12:01:33 PM »

You do realize that any commercials that corporations make directly are required to reveal their source?
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2010, 04:27:34 PM »

You do realize that any commercials that corporations make directly are required to reveal their source?

It's the indirect ones that cause problems.

How is that really affected by this verdict though?
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


« Reply #3 on: February 08, 2010, 03:34:33 PM »

Is there any particular reason why President Obama couldn't theoretically pull an Andrew Jackson, and dare the Court to try to enforce its ruling? 

Is that really a precedent we want to be setting?
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


« Reply #4 on: February 08, 2010, 03:45:52 PM »

Is there any particular reason why President Obama couldn't theoretically pull an Andrew Jackson, and dare the Court to try to enforce its ruling?  

Is that really a precedent we want to be setting?

There are certain decisions that the Supreme Court has made in the past that would have warranted such a response -why not this one?  

How do we decide which decisons to respect and which not?

I think it sets a really dangerous precedent.....especially for times when we have the wrong president.
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


« Reply #5 on: February 08, 2010, 06:11:50 PM »

The whole process is based on respect for judicial rulings. If we make exceptions, even on matters that are considered "important enough"....that defeats the purpose of seperation of powers and the rule of law.

It's not something I would ever be willing to risk.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.02 seconds with 13 queries.