No politician would ever vote against getting unlimited and legal slush funds
A couple would.
But yes not most
Pitchforks & Molotov coctails can be very motivating to representatives
Liberty comes at the end of a gun.
They’ll never give it to you. You have to take it.
I’ll believe it when I see it
possibly the worst Supreme Court decision ever handed down - and there are a whole shitload of awful SC decisions - strictly b/c it was immediately apparent to anyone with two brain cells to rub together how it would enable and entrench corruption and influence in American politics
possibly the worst Supreme Court decision ever handed down
Perhaps, but you’re going up against the classics. Dred Scott. Plessy v. Ferguson. Korematsu.
Also, Citizens United was only the latest in a long series of bad decisions that gradually elevated sociopathic artificial entities over natural persons.
- Dartmouth College v Woodward
- Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad
- Dodge v Ford Motor Co.
etc.
Citizens United will be remembered as that one time John Roberts accidentally destroyed the United States because of his hubris. A really cool dude, that John Roberts.
It wasn’t an accident. There’s a great podcast called 5-4 that has gone through some of the worst decisions in history. They talked about Citizens United, and how Roberts had to stretch the truth to come to that decision. He’s done that a lot, he does the Roberts two-step, when he first upholds a law that he doesn’t like, but makes up some shit about how there are “questions” about it, and then his allies in the broader Conservative movement then bring a lawsuit that specifically targets one of those “questions” so that Roberts can overturn the law.
Thomas does something similar, except it’s even more egregious, he will write an unhinged dissent or concurrence that makes bonkers legal arguments that may or may not be fully related to the case at hand, and then when he’s up to write for the majority, he’ll cite his own arguments in those dissents and concurrences. Those documents have zero legal weight, but he cites them as if they were settled law.
Actually, one of the many times John Roberts
accidentallypurposely destroyed the United States because of his hubris.The best argument for time travel is our ancestors somehow already knew a toilet should be called “the John.”
Let’s turn that could be into an is
Turn them into was/were.
With this Supreme Court?
I was gonna say Clarence Thomas is building a larger garage for all the RVs he’s getting to proclaim Citizens is here to stay.
They’ll probably replace it with something even worse
Is someone handing out drugs? There is no way that is happening. Not without massive legislation and likely some convictions.
Your scenario is rather optimistic, honestly.
It would be a massive win for all of us peons just trying to survive while our gov actively tries to kill us.
You can’t end citizens united without first overturning Buckley v Valeo
If we do this, please don’t half ass it.
Im gonna call this now.
If on some chance the supreme court strikes down SpeechNow because of this, they’ll somehow stay it until after the next general election as its “too soon” and “too hard” to change it now.
Shit we occupied nearly every city in the country demanding this, and we couldn’t get it then
So I have mixed feelings.
So obviously it’s a bad thing. But. Because it’s now legal to bribe. We know who is getting bribed easily.
Once it becomes illegal again it’s going to be harder to know who is getting bribed.
If only it were legal, bank robbers wouldn’t have to wear masks. Then we would know who’s doing it.
