GOP files a brief that will end this country if they win
- Thread starter evince
- Start date
evince
Truthmatters
Summary of the Argument
In Citizens United V The Federal Elecction Commision, 130 S.Ct. 876,904 (2010), the Supreme Court stated "f the first Amendment has any force, it prohibits Congreess from fining or jailing citizens, or associations of citizens for simply enguaging in political speech." Yet that is precisely what is happening in this case. The Defendants- Appellees face imprisonment under count 4 of the indictment simply for seeking to enguage in political speech through the Corporate form.
This is on page 2
In Citizens United V The Federal Elecction Commision, 130 S.Ct. 876,904 (2010), the Supreme Court stated "f the first Amendment has any force, it prohibits Congreess from fining or jailing citizens, or associations of citizens for simply enguaging in political speech." Yet that is precisely what is happening in this case. The Defendants- Appellees face imprisonment under count 4 of the indictment simply for seeking to enguage in political speech through the Corporate form.
This is on page 2
SmarterthanYou
rebel
how does this end the country?????
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
do elaborate... what portion of that will 'end this country'? I ask because I don't want to read a long document and have to GUESS what has you riled up.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Pretty much the same as they look today. Dominated by large corporations and unions and billionaire's funding.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
pretty much what Freak just said. it's not up to the courts to make this illegal, but up to us, we the people, to better educate ourselves about who's running for office.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
tell me...who are the defendants/appellees and what did they argue?
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
why won't you answer my question? the brief you cited is not the official brief of the case. who are the defendants, why are they defendants and what are they arguing?
hint - they are not republicans and are arguing virtually the same thing.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
why is it you refuse to debate the facts? i would argue no such thing. the fact is, your OP singles out the GOP as if it is only their plan and case. the truth is, that the case is about democrats arguing that corporations should be allowed to donate. the GOP is merely offering a brief in support of their argument.
so your claim that it is the GOP is a false claim.
icedancer2theend
Verified User
Yes, corporations, are now on equal footing with unions in regards to campaign donations- very scary. Imagine unions who receive forced member contributions getting to freely spend on campaign ads- Shocking! I am sure they spend equally on GOP candidates, because they recognize that some of their members are republicans~
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
i read most of the brief and could not find one single instance where they asked that corps be allowed unlimited funds directly to a candidate. in fact, i found the opposite, where they argued the fund limits placed by FECA, ensures corps will be just like individuals.
perhaps you could cite to where they ask that corporate funds be unlimited.
:lol:
SmarterthanYou
rebel
the founders would have revolted against the feds decades ago. this country is so far removed from what the founders intended that it makes zero sense for anyone that promotes a living constitutional theory to suddenly claim something is against what the founders wanted.