85
Record contributions from dark money groups and shell companies flooded 2022 midterm elections (www.opensecrets.org)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/usa@lemmy.ml
10 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14 points 3 years ago (5 children)

Citizens United is one of the worst Supreme Court decisions of all time. Definitely not the worst decision, but it's not too far off.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    But more dark money is pouring into federal elections with less disclosure, and 501(c)(4) nonprofits that don’t disclose their donors reported less than $25 million in spending to the FEC during the entire 2022 election cycle — the lowest total since the **Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision **rolled back restrictions on corporate political speech. Months later, the Supreme Court’s SpeechNow.org v. FEC ruling —which effectively paved the way for super PACs — ushered in a new era of massive donations and groups spending unlimited sums on independent expenditures.

    I can't help but notice that the Supreme Court is really leading the way with "bribes are cool" decisions here. It's almost like they are a corrupt group of people getting lavish gifts.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    It's almost like the supreme court leaves legislation to the legislative branch.

    If people want something changes in our laws, regulations and constitution, it's the legislative branch they need to go through. Which has separate powers than the supreme court.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    The whole reason we're in this problem in the first place is that the legislative branch has basically ceded its power. People in Congress don't want to be responsible for changing laws so they just have the Supreme Court do it for them. There was no way any kind of anti-abortion legislation was ever going to make it through Congress, so they just legislated from the bench and had the Supreme Court take away women's rights.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    The whole reason we’re in this problem in the first place is that the legislative branch has basically ceded its power.

    Agreed.

    People in Congress don’t want to be responsible for changing laws so they just have the Supreme Court do it for them.

    Disagree. That's not at all what's happening. Congress ceded their power to the president with the executive orders, and a mistake by the supreme court case resulting in the Chevron Deference, which should be ruled against next year.

    so they just legislated from the bench and had the Supreme Court take away women’s rights.

    Incorrect. They determined the previous ruling, which was actually so terrible RBG actively spoke against it and told the Dem's they needed to codify RVW, was incorrect. And they were right. There's absolutely no way judges, outside of activist judges, could have ruled RVW implementing term limitations for abortions. Their ruling should be based on the constitution, and nowhere can you ever extrapolate the constitution to determine at X weeks a baby is X way so they can be aborted, or past X weeks is too far for an abortion.

    It should have always been a states issue.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago

    They determined the previous ruling, which was actually so terrible RBG actively spoke against it and told the Dem's they needed to codify RVW, was incorrect. And they were right. There's absolutely no way judges, outside of activist judges, could have ruled RVW implementing term limitations for abortions.

    And yet, during their confirmation hearings these judges were asked about RVW and they all disagreed with everything you said, calling it established precedent and settled law that has been set for 50 years. I wish at least one of the conservative judges had not lied about how they feel about precedent and RVW during their confirmation. But of course they had to lie in order to acquire the power to do what Congress is unwilling to do.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent