We The Bechtel

The Supreme Court has just released a very important decision which regards corporate financing of political advertising. Below, I’m embedding and attaching a version of the decision which I have hilighted. Given that the actual document is very long, and would take a few hours to read, I have provided this hilighted version so that you may quickly pick up all the salient points. My hilighting is limited to the majority’s opinion, pp. 1 – 57, and then the dissent, pp. 81 – 170 of the document.

Yes, I know I’m a law student, and I read cases all the time, but to those of you who are not law students, I’d like to encourage you to take a look at my hilights of this very important case. When’s the last time you read a Supreme Court opinion anyway?

The majority basically said that the First Amendment prohibits a ban on political advertisements funded by corporate money. The dissent claims that the major corrupting potential of such advertising subverts the very principles which the First Amendment seeks to protect. Make no mistake; this is a case about the very fundamental values of our political system.

I hope you will take a look at what I have hilighted. I’ve attempted to draw your attention to enough background so that you will have a deeper understanding of each side’s best arguments. If you are going to read the document in the embedded Google Docs viewer, I recommend that you click the full screen icon in the top right… the resulting reading experience is much better. You may also download the file and read it in your preferred PDF viewer.

Direct Download – [PDF]

Posted in: Commentary, Constitutional Law, Legal Issues, Outrages, Politics, System Abuse

This entry was posted on Friday, January 22nd, 2010 at 5:15 am and is filed under Commentary, Constitutional Law, Legal Issues, Outrages, Politics, System Abuse. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

3 Responses to “We The Bechtel”

Gregory Bariseaux

January 22nd, 2010

The case was correctly decided. Human being have banded together since time immemorial, because there is strength in numbers, so people formed clubs (Sierra Club), associations (NAACP), political parties and corporations, both profit (IBM) and non-profit (AARP). Corporate speech can be limited only by infringing the free speech rights of flesh and blood human beings. Volumes of regulations outlining, none too clearly, what and when corporations can speak serve only to chill political discourse; better to shut up than risk fines and lawsuits. Corporations represent many different points of view; let a thousand voices compete.

WD

January 23rd, 2010

Disagree. Bank of America is going to get a lot further than the people looking for relief from them. Obama sums it up nicely, as usual. Let’s see if/what Congress can deliver. I’m skeptical.

Claudette

January 24th, 2010

My inclination is to agree with Mr. Barison not Mr. Bariseaux. However, the savior here might be the internet as the vehicle for “free” speech. In this regard watch closely the dynamic between the USA and China re Google.
Mr. Obama and the Congress have not been capable of maximizing their moment. So far, very disappointing.

Leave a Reply