Supreme Court & Federal Election Commission

A supreme court is the highest court within the hierarchy of many legal jurisdictions. The Federal Election Commission (or FEC) is an independent regulatory agency that was founded in 1975 by the United States Congress to regulate the campaign finance legislation in the United States. 5.0/5

Supreme Court Federal Election Commission Citizens United First Amendment United States Public Citizen Election Commission President Barack Obama David Bossie Responsive Politics Robert Reich John Paul Stevens Chief Justice John Roberts Brian Schweitzer Common Cause Dred Scott

another unfortunate affect of the U.S. Supreme Court decision on Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission:
BREAKING: Senate moves forward on Constitutional Amendment to overturn Citizens United(!) Moments ago, the Senate voted to move forward on a measure overturning Citizens United. We can hardly believe it! Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. ___ (2010), (Docket No. 08-205), is a U.S. constitutional law case dealing with the regulation of campaign spending by corporations. The United States Supreme Court held that the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent political expenditures by corporations. The principles articulated by the Supreme Court in the case have also been extended to labor unions and other associations.
FROM THE NEWSROOM: HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Lawyers for former Connecticut Gov. John Rowland are arguing that some of the federal charges he faces are unconstitutional. They filed new arguments Monday night seeking to have much of the case against the 57-year-old Former Governor dismissed. Rowland is accused of trying to create secret paid consultant roles with two congressional campaigns in 2010 and 2012. Charges include conspiracy, falsifying records in a federal investigation, causing false statements to be made to the Federal Election Commission, and causing illegal campaign contributions. He has pleaded not guilty. Among other things, Rowland's lawyers argue that campaign finance restrictions cited by the government are unconstitutional based on recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings. They also argue that some finance limits cited by the government only apply to contributions, not to campaign expenditures.
Do not blame the NET NEUTRALITY issue on Chairman Tom Wheeler, the head of the FCC. He is being FORCED via “VERIZON, APPELLANT v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, APPELLEE” United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, Decided January 14, 2014 to make adjustment in his net neutrality POLICY! I have said it BEFORE and I will say it again until YOU HEAR IT! Take our COUNTRY back from 5 Black Robed Royalist persons on the Supreme Court and their Article III Brother persons legislating from the bench with self-servingly asserted "absolutely immune" as the would be Kings that THINK they can do no wrong! Religious Leaders, Net Neutrality Advocates, Campaign Finance Reform Advocates, Pro-Life, Pro-Choice, NSA Haters, Senator Bernie Sanders, LGBT community, Father’s Rights, ACLU, President Obama, House Speaker John Boehner, Senator Ted Cruz, Democrats, Liberals, Independents, Libertarians, Rand Paul, Tea Party, Snowden, and GOP have ALL MISSED THE ISSUE. The constitution never I ...
What is Chief Justice Roberts' opinion from the bench re: money and US politics ( excerpt from the recent Supreme Court ruling McCutcheon vs FEC. ) "...Ingratiation and access [by the wealthy to politicians] are not corruption . no matter how desirable it may seem, it is not an acceptable governmental objective to level the playing field or to level electoral opportunities or to equalize the financial resources of candidates." Ouch. So in the Court's majority opinion, Any effort by Congress or the Federal Election Commission to govern, manage or control big money effect on political campaign speech is "not acceptable" . That's your Court. This seems over the top and does not feel very good. Link below is a podcast for those who want to consider the significance. Dan Carlin does some great history podcasts too.
Auctions instead of Elections Projo Editorial THE LATEST RULING by the U.S. Supreme Court, striking down “aggregate limits” relating to political campaign funding has led to a complete reversal of contribution laws, enacted in the aftermath of Watergate to prevent rich Americans from buying votes. The Supreme Court in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission struck down the overall limits on campaign contributions, though it did not touch the limit (of $2,600 per election) on individual contributions to presidential or congressional candidates. Led by Chief Justice John Roberts and four other conservative justices, the court said the overall limits intrude on a citizen’s ability to exercise the most fundamental First Amendment activity. Justice Clarence Thomas, the most conservative member of the court, said he would have gone further and removed all restrictions on political contributions. Critics have, however, slammed the judgment, arguing that this would encourage political corruption on an unh ...
After the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision Wednesday that threw out a cap on the total amount wealthy donors can give to federal candidates in an election season, Democrats and self-proclaimed do-gooders cried foul at the prospect of more big money's tainting Washington politics. Federal law continues to cap individual contributions to congressional candidates at $5,200, but the McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission decision eliminated the $48,600 cap on the total individuals can contribute to candidates and the $74,600 cap on donations to political committees. An online New York Times story announced, "The ruling, issued near the start of a campaign season, will change and very likely increase the already large role money plays in American politics." Stop, please. I beg you. The hypocrisy is appalling. The Center for Responsive Politics' OpenSecrets.org estimates that GOP biggie Sheldon Adelson and his wife 'bulldozed' (owww...powerword) $93 million into conservative super PACs in 2012. Does ...
The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on a key campaign finance case that has been dubbed “the next Citizens United.” The case, McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, is named for Shaun McCutcheon, a Republican donor who wants the Court to throw out the aggregate limits on what an indi...
Proposed IRS Rules Drawing Criticism From Unexpected Places For some time now, the IRS has been working to codify its abuse of power and political persecution of the Tea Party and other conservative groups. As we noted two weeks ago, the new rules were being ironed out at least by 2012 and probably sooner, though the proposed regulations weren't published in the Federal Register until November 2013. In short, the IRS aims to newly categorize all kinds of nonprofit activities as political and thus subject to additional scrutiny, in essence restoring elements of campaign finance reform that the Supreme Court struck down in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission in 2010. So-called 501(c)(4)s -- named for the tax code section under which they are created -- are tax-exempt nonprofits that work to advance social welfare. Yet the IRS proposes to classify as political any group's communication, public or private, if it expresses "a view on, whether for or against, the selection, nomination, election, or a ...
When the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Citizens United over the Federal Election Commission, Democrats expressed concern over what it could mean to the political environment of the country.  Instead of elected officials focusing on carrying out their...
Refer to 2010 Supreme Court ruling Citizens United v Federal Election Commission. Basically, corporations are treated as
Rarely have so few imposed such damage on so many. When five conservative members of the Supreme Court handed for-profit corporations the right to secretly flood political campaigns with tidal waves of cash on the eve of an election, they moved America closer to outright plutocracy, where political power derived from wealth is devoted to the protection of wealth. It is now official: Just as they have adorned our athletic stadiums and multiple places of public assembly with their logos, corporations can officially put their brand on the government of the United States as well as the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the fifty states. The decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission giving “artificial entities” the same rights of “free speech” as living, breathing human beings will likely prove as infamous as the Dred Scott ruling of 1857 that opened the unsettled territories of the United States to slavery whether future inhabitants wanted it or not. It took a civil war ...
"Mr. Obama had promised in his 2008 campaign to 'fundamentally transform the United States' and he kept that promise in 2010 when he used this most august, most formal occasion of our republic to deliver a blistering denunciation of the Supreme Court's ruling in the controversial case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. The black-robed Justices were seated before him as he tongue-lashed them. They had been invited as honored guests. But Mr. Obama wanted them there as props. He wanted to show the world that he was master in our house. ... During the campaign, he had egged on his supporters, telling them to 'get in their faces.' The night of his 2010 State of the Union Address, Barack Obama got in their faces. ... His arrogant and offensive behavior toward the Supreme Court of the United States ... was the opening gun in the race to crush his opponents. It was not a great stretch for middle level bureaucrats at IRS to see that they would please this president if they made life miserable for h ...
Today was the anniversary of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the dreadful US Supreme Court case that codified into law, once and for all, that our elections are not determined by "we the people," but by the unmitigated spending of plutocrats, quick to invest in politicians to become the rulers of our country. It's not that they deserve this power, or have earned it, but they steal the sovereignty of the people by making our representatives unaccountable to us anyway. Their unwarranted power is becoming ever bit as unlimited as their ability to spend money in our elections. So it's time to right the course, it's time to Move To Amend, to overrule the court in Citizens United, and in all the cases that they've stepped on our power to control our own creatures of the law. And to be especially clear that this problem we face is a very old one; In the words of Teddy Roosevelt, “If our political institutions were perfect, they would absolutely prevent the political domination of money in any p ...
The Corporate World « The Wall Street Cartel Articles Floating Currencies » Corporate Empire vs. the Free Market: Reports From an ex-Corporate Insider By Damon Vrabel Wednesday, February 3, 2010 Given the recent Supreme Court decision (Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission) to remove limits on corporate spending in federal elections, the time has come to reconsider the entrenched American belief about corporations before they kill off the Free Market for good. The gap between belief and reality on this issue is profound In the destructive left vs. right paradigm of American politics, the right loudly proclaims the benevolence of corporations fueling freedom’s cause. I subscribed to this ideology as well—that is until I actually experienced corporate reality. The right seems to equate corporations with the fundamental essence of America and the ideals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Thomas Jefferson would be stunned. On the other hand, the left instinctively feels that ...
The new topic: On balance, the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission harms the election process.
Hamilton Collection
Political spending set new records in 2012, which saw the first presidential election since the Supreme Court s landmark Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling.
Write in presidential candidate: Lowell Jackson "Jack" Fellure. YEAH! "My Presidential Campaign Platform is the Authorized 1611 King James Bible. God Almighty wrote that Book as the supreme constitution and absolute authority in the affairs of all men for all time and eternity. It shall never be necessary to change it. Quality leather bound copies of this Bible have been sent to the Presidential Office, the Supreme Court, the Senate, the House of Representatives, the National Republican Party, the National Democratic Party, and the Federal Election Commission." What... you guys wanted a more Christianity oriented government, right?
In early 2008, the case, known as Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission was brought to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. This court sided with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) that Hillary: The Movie could not be shown on television right before the 2008 Democratic primaries under the McCain-Feingold Act.[3] The Supreme Court docketed this case on August 18, 2008,[4] and heard oral arguments on March 24, 2009.[5][6][7] A decision was expected sometime in the early summer months of 2009.[8] However, on June 29, 2009, the Supreme Court issued an order directing the parties to re-argue the case on September 9 after issuing briefs on larger issues. The court ruled 5-4 in 2010 that spending limits in the McCain-Feingold act were unconstitutional, allowing essentially unlimited contributions by corporations and unions to political action committees. This was one of the most controversial rulings of the term. _ The original court decision helped to eliminate smear campa ...
I just signed a petition to The United States House of Representatives and President Barack Obama: We the undersigned, being eligible voters in the United States of America, support a permissive referendum to reverse the Supreme Court's decision on Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
To my Republican friends--you can't possibly think that the conservative-led Supreme Court's siding with Citizen's United (versus the Federal Election Commission) was a good thing. Money is speech? Corporations are people, my friend? Therefore, under the First Amendment, the government can't stop corporations from spending money on politics however they choose. And then right-wingers continue their efforts to undermine and eliminate unions as well? It was that decision that caused scores of people to take to the streets in protest as they began the Occupy Wall Street movement. Did you forget that we bailed out Wall Street, too? Are you happy with all the Leveraged Buy Outs? Heck, even Justice Stevens was appalled at what Justice Roberts had concocted when he said the Court was opening "the floodgates for special interests--including foreign corporations--to spend without limit in our elections." The elections are truly being bought, people. Romney reminds me of Al Checchi, the former CEO of Nort ...
Resolution passed in opposition of US Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. the Federal Election Commission
The so-called Citizens United case offers the Supreme Court a chance to severely curtail the free speech abuses of the Federal Election Commission. John Samples, Director of the Cato Institute's Center for Representative Government, Institute for Justice Senior Attorney Steve Simpson and George Maso...
January 9, 2012, 3:34 pm Supreme Court Retains Ban on Foreign Campaign Donations By JOHN H. CUSHMAN JR. In a terse four words, the Supreme Court on Monday issued an order upholding prohibitions against foreigners making contributions to influence American elections. The decision clamped shut an opening that some thought the court had created two years ago in its Citizens United decision, when it relaxed campaign-finance limits on corporations and labor unions. On Monday the Supreme Court, upholding a lower court’s decision in Bluman, et al., v. Federal Election Commission, refused to extend its reasoning in Citizens United to cover foreigners living temporarily here. Foreign nationals, other than lawful permanent residents, are completely banned from donating to candidates or parties, or making independent expenditures in federal, state or local elections. The Supreme Court’s order did not discuss the merits or suggest that there was any dissent among the justices.
Senate Debates Disclose Act: The Senate on Monday debated a measure that would require public filings with the Federal Election Commission by organizations that give $10,000 or more to sway the outcome of elections. Sen. Bernie Sanders urged the Senate to pass the legislation that was a response to the disastrous 5-4 Supreme Court Citizens United decision, which lifted limits on campaign spending by corporations and wealthy individuals. Continue reading here:
As the clock turns to midnight and as a country we celebrate today our Independence Day, I am thankful for the gift of being an American. In that same moment after watching national news tonight as is my habit, I realize that this election year will be like no other we have seen. I am already sick of the political ads, but thanks to the partisan Supreme Court 5-4 vote in Citizens United V. the Federal Election Commission that in summary concluded that corporations were citizens and that campaign contributions were free speech, I am in store for about $2billion more of this speech. I take my right and responsibility to vote seriously especially in presidential elections, and I have not always voted for the winer. I feel in my 30 years of voting I have only made one pure "waste" of a vote when I voted for Ross Perot. Maybe if there were more ads and I heard more than 30 second snippets I would have realized that he was an out of control wealthy man who after having anything money could buy wanted power. In ...
This month, Democratic President Barack Obama's re-election campaign asked the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to force Crossroads GPS, a tax-exempt group founded by former George W. Bush adviser Karl Rove, to register as a PAC and disclose its donors. Funny, these IRS inquiries never seem to go after liberal groups. Isn’t that amazing. The real problem here is our tax code and our tax agency. How many times have we Republicans promise to make April 15 just another day on the calendar? With the Supreme Court deciding that Obamacare is actually a tax, Americans are outraged that we are seeing the largest tax increase in the history of America.
A couple problems: The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) allows the U.S. military to indefinitely detain U.S. citizens under the suspicion of being connected to terrorism. No proof is necessary. If you ask the FBI, a terrorist can be defined as a Christian, Occupy protester, someone who owns guns and ammo, someone who pays for items with cash, Tea Party activist, someone who has more than 7 days of food stored, someone with missing fingers, someone who buys flashlights, someone who texts privately in a public space, libertarian, someone who doesn’t like the Federal Reserve Bank, someone who believes conspiracy theories, someone who owns gold or silver, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. The list is endless, and just about every single person in the United States has been deemed a terrorist. You may now be legally disappeared under the NDAA. Citizen United v. Federal Election Commission was a Supreme Court decision which affirmed that corporations are essentially human beings and money is speech. The ...
So yeah, ruling on Obamacare today. Of course we don't choose our justices, but *how* much money have those whose profits are at stake thrown at them? I guess spending is only a vote when it comes to us average consumers, because it keeps us from going directly to the source of a problem. And few people seem to have noticed that the Supreme Court upheld Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission just a few days ago. Cause and effect, folks. The more power you give big money interests, the less power is in the hands of the people.
After just two years, the Supreme Court will, starting today, reexamine one of its most controversial decisions: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
In the wake of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, corporations are spending hundreds of millions of dollars to ensure that their interests are the ones our politicians are concerned about, at the expense of the interests of the American people.
"For those who believe money already has too much power in U.S. politics, 2012 will be a miserable year. The Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, lassitude at the Federal Election Commission and the growing audacity of very rich conservatives have created a new political system that will make the politics of the Gilded Age look like a clean government paradise. Americans won’t even fully know what’s happening to them because so much can be donated in secrecy to opaque organizations. It’s always helpful for voters to know who is trying to buy an election, and for whom. This time, much of the auction will be held in private. You can be sure that the candidates will find out who helped elect them, but the voters will remain in the dark. "
Will the Supreme Court take another crack at its ‘Citizens United’ ruling? Justices are scheduled Thursday behind closed doors to discuss Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the landmark 2010 decision holding that corporations can make unlimited independent expenditures using general tre...
Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission 130 S.Ct. 876 (2010) (Supreme Court): This is the Decision of th...
This just in from Public Citizen: The actions of hundreds of activists in California who have worked tirelessly with Public Citizen’s Democracy Is For People Campaign and other allies are paying off this week as the California State Senate is expected to pass a resolution calling for the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission U.S. Supreme Court ruling to be overturned!
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission - YouTube: A brief summary of the Supreme Court case Citizens Uni...
washingtonpost.com - We are about to have the worst presidential campaign money can buy. The Supreme Court’s dreadful Citizens United decision and a somnolent Federal Election Commission will allow hundreds of millions of dollars from a small number of very wealthy people and interests to inundate o...
(CNSNews.com) – David Bossie, founder of the conservative group Citizens United, says that people advocating to overturn the landmark Supreme Court case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission are a “posse of radicals” who are trying to "overturn the First Amendment."
Two years ago today, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission was decided by the Supreme Court.
Snoop Dogg White House Donald Trump President Trump Ben Affleck Steve King New Zealand President Donald Trump Rachel Maddow North Korea Orson Welles Cheltenham Festival South Korea Federal Reserve Theresa May America First Justice Department Jose Mourinho Paul Pogba Champions League Samuel L. Jackson Geert Wilders Air Force Kellyanne Conway Rex Tillerson Park Geun David Cay Johnston National Insurance Ed Sheeran St Patrick Justice Dept President Barack Obama Jeremy Corbyn Philip Hammond March Madness Ian Bremmer John Legend Nick Viall Daily News Guinness Storehouse Rogue One Chrissy Teigen Melania Trump Mad Men Mutual Fund Middle East Beach Boys Dakota Access Paul Ryan Maisie Williams Northern Ireland South Africa Europa League Queen Mother Champion Chase Manchester United Gianluigi Buffon London School Great British Bake Off Nintendo Switch Romelu Lukaku Austrian Alps Prue Leith Prince Harry Mark Rutte Arron Banks Health Plan Chinese President Xi Jinping State Rex Tillerson Sean Spicer Ivanka Trump Barack Obama United Kingdom Artem Anisimov White Sox Death Spiral Trump Tower Lake Forest Corey Crawford Planned Parenthood Public Health Mount St Milo Ventimiglia Emma Watson Richard Spencer House Republicans Bernie Sanders Kansas State Josh Gad Michael Brown Las Vegas Australian Open Ewan Mcgregor Supreme Court Music Box British Gas Mona Lisa Marc Quinn Hugh Jackman Malcolm Mclaren Gulf Coast
© 2017