Roberts Court & Citizens United

In the United States, the Roberts Court refers to the Supreme Court of the United States since 2005, under the leadership of Chief Justice John G. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. ––––, 130 S.Ct. 876 (January 21, 2010), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that the First Amendment prohibited the government from restricting independent political expenditures by corporations and unions. 5.0/5

Roberts Court Citizens United Voting Rights Act Jeffrey Toobin First Amendment John Roberts Hobby Lobby Doug Harris Bob Mcdonnell Lee Roberts Charles Blow Supreme Court Heritage Foundation Judicial Activism Justice Stevens Karl Rove Koch Brothers Sheldon Adelson

Citizens United & gutting of Voting Rights Act evil twins of Roberts Court, making it easier to buy election & harder to vot…
Roberts court gave us Citizens United "money is speech" just ludicrous but equally daft is John Roberts interceding in Bob Mcdonnell's case!
Roberts Court conservatives handed this Country "Citizens United." Time to get rid of!
In "both Harris and Hobby Lobby, the Roberts Court is doubling down on mistakes it made in Citizens United"
Congress for sale, now more than ever By Bill Press, Tribune Content Agency, Bill Press Posted 04/03/2014 at 5:30 pm EST As chief justice, I have no doubt that John G. Roberts' number one goal is to turn this democracy into a plutocracy. And he's well on his way to doing so. It didn't start with the Roberts Court, of course. It started with the court's 1976 Buckley v. Valeo decision, which defined campaign contributions as an expression of free speech, protected by the First Amendment, which, if you think about it, just doesn't add up. Under the First Amendment, every American enjoys the same freedom to talk, talk, talk. But not every American has the same capacity to write big checks. Equating the two is absurd. Yet even Buckley v. Valeo maintained limits on how much money any individual could contribute, in order to minimize the risk of "quid pro quo" political corruption. It's those very safeguards that John Roberts now appears determined to get rid of. He started with the 2010 Citizens United decision ...
You can seriously ask that in the age if the Roberts Court & Citizens United? 0.o
."Today’s opinion by the Roberts Court was the most radical since Citizens United v. FEC."
Overturning Section 5 of Voting Rights Act would be most radical decision of Roberts Court since Citizens United
With its ruling in the Citizens United case, the Roberts Court opened the floodgates for anonymous special interest groups to spend limitless sums on political campaigns. The effects have been devastating. People like Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers are bombarding the airwaves with attack ads, with no accountability whatsoever. Nothing less than the integrity of our democracy is at stake. Corporate money now dominates our political discourse, and it's undermining the ability of our political leaders to represent their constituents. Enough! It's time to take action to ensure that our elected officials are being sent to Washington to represent the interests of the people, not anonymous special interest groups with deep pockets.
Turn into Bill Moyers & Co. this week as they take on the extreme right-wing Supreme Court, Citizen's United and Carl Rove. 'The Nation' Takes on the One-Percent Court by John Light This week on the program, Bill spoke with Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor and publisher of The Nation, and Jamie Raskin, an American University law professor and Democratic state senator from Maryland who wrote one of the essays appearing in this week’s special issue of The Nation. Titled “The One Percent Court,” the issue exposes favoritism the Roberts Court has shown toward big business. Here at, we’re excited to publish three of the essays that appear in “The One Percent Court.” The introduction to the issue was co-authored by Bill and historian Bernard Weisberger, and traces the Supreme Court’s consolidation of power from the institution’s beginning until today, when, as Bill and Weisberger write, SCOTUS has be
The precedents the Roberts Court is setting are making it easier for corporations to exercise the rights of American citizens without corresponding civic responsibilities.
Classy Atlantic piece (won't link) characterizing Citizens United as "Roberts Court's ongoing project to put our democracy up for auction."
How many people think the Supreme Court was right about both Citizens United and Obamacare? John Roberts, Spitzer, Kinsley, me and??
This article suggest that an amendment can undo the evil of Citizens United and other bad decisions by our right-wing activist Supremes. Here's a quote: "as distorted beyond recognition by the Roberts Court, the First Amendment becomes not the guardian of equal democratic liberties but the guarantee of _unequal_ protection of the laws."
Nearly two-thirds of Americans are opposed to the consequences of the landmark 2010 Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, a new poll released Tuesday shows. The poll, conducted by the PERT Group on behalf of the First Amendment Center, shows that 63 percent disagr...
I think the Roberts Court will be permanently stained by Citizens United.
Does Roberts really want to be Chief of a court who brought Citizens United and demise of HCR? Legacy.
Is the SCOTUS ruling on Citizens United legit? Can we trust the future rulings of a Roberts led court won't be partisan?
Citizens United will always be know as stain on the soul of justice Roberts' court
We applaud the state of Montana in their courts challenge on Citizens United - to paraphrase Justice Stevens (retired) "...the court has become incoherent on the 1st amendment since Citizens United". Watch for the likely summary reversal from the Roberts court, using a 'per curiam' (unsigned) decision, showing their dismal disregard for jurisprudence and a glib dismissal of the sound legal grounds to overturn Citizens United (or even to dissent - Per curiam are unsigned, a signed dissent is fighting a phantom). Now it gets interesting, a line is being drawn between jurisprudence and the economic expedients of the power elite. "Who's side, who's side are you on..."
Jeffrey Toobin's fascinating examination of the Citizens United decision and what it says about the Roberts Court:
"Citizens United is a distinctive product of the Roberts Court. The decision followed a lengthy and bitter...
Citizens United, Judicial Activism and the record of the Roberts Court. Not what you'd think.
A must read from Jeffrey Toobin: How the Roberts Court's Judicial Activism lead to Citizens United.
Jeffrey Toobin on the Citizens United decision: How Chief Justice John Roberts orchestrated the Citizens United decision, New Yorker: ...In one sense, the story of the Citizens United case goes back more than a hundred years. It begins in the...
WHY HAVE REPUBLICANS NOT REPEALED ROE V. WADE? The next time a religious right Tea Klux Klanner shouts that if you are for Obama you are for abortion, ask him or her this question. Their REAL god Reagan took over in 1980, and since that time we have suffered through 20 years of Republican presidents, yet NOT ONE of them has told the Supreme Court to Repeal Roe v. Wade. The Koch Brothers told the Roberts court to repeal over one hundred years of campaign finance regulations with their Heritage Foundation "(Billionaire) Citizens United," so why not Roe? Here's why: the top 1% which controls Republicans does NOT want to repeal Roe BECAUSE ROE IS A GREAT WEDGE ISSUE TO GIN UP THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT FOR VOTES EVERY FOUR YEARS. It has worked like a charm for 32 years; watch for a carpet bombing of sermons against Obama this fall because he is "pro abortion" and Republicans "will do something about it." Right.
" October Gallup poll found that the percentage of people who thought that the court was too liberal was higher than those who thought that it was too conservative by nearly half (31 percent to 21 percent). Yes, you read that right: the Roberts court, which gave us Citizens United, was too LIBERAL." (Charles Blow, in NYTimes)
Supreme Court,under John Roberts,have taken down democracy with the swoop of a pen.Citizens United could care less about USA
Not a surprise that the Roberts Court has REPEATEDLY legislated from the bench. From Carhart to Citizens United.
Donald Trump White House Super Bowl David Rockefeller Ivanka Trump Neil Gorsuch Chuck Berry West Wing Director James Comey Sesame Street House Republicans Tom Brady Supreme Court Le Pen Ed Sheeran European Union North Korea South Korea New Zealand President Trump Puerto Rico Dakota Access Derry City Manchester United Judge Gorsuch Claudio Ranieri Middle Eastern Kim Kardashian West Judge Neil Gorsuch Theresa May Judge Napolitano San Francisco Capitol Hill Tomi Lahren Spike Lee Arsene Wenger Wonder Woman Rex Tillerson Tom Watson Colin Kaepernick Marine Le Pen Bill Gates President Donald Trump Jamie Vardy South Sudan Zayn Malik Tim Cook New Video National Parks Russell Westbrook Marie Slaughter Middle East Mutual Fund Jeremy Corbyn State Department Homeland Security Tim Allen Selena Gomez Secret Service Katy Perry Kellyanne Conway Iron Fist Tiger Woods Jeff Jones Penn State South Africa Premier League Trump White House World Happiness Report Fox Business Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie Cook County Pink Floyd Rico Rodriguez War Machine Vladimir Putin United Nations Daily News Scott Pruitt James Blake Bastian Schweinsteiger Brad Underwood House Intelligence Committee Des Plaines Nintendo Switch Sean Spicer Justice Department Gale Sayers Eddie Jones Gareth Southgate Philip Hammond James B. Comey Peaky Blinders St Patrick North Carolina Standard Life Central Park James Comey Andrew Napolitano Aaron Hernandez
© 2017