Ingrid Martine is a leadership coach who interacts with many business leaders, mostly in small businesses. She has written an intriguing critique of the Citizens United decision on her blog, pointing out the dangers of large corporations, such as the advantage they now have over small businesses regarding political speech.
“Money is the bottom line. And now money equals speech. Can you compete with the roar of the corporations?” she writes. Continue reading
by Barb and Kellye
This is the final post in a 4 part series covering the 7 major questions considered in the Supreme Court’s Citizens United case (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3). This post covers the last 2 questions. One question involves whether the courts should give proper deference to legislatures in deciding if and how to regulate political spending. The other question concerns whether the playing field between media corporations and all other corporations should be leveled when it comes to unlimited free speech.
Should legislatures be given proper deference by the courts in deciding if and how to regulate corporate political spending? Continue reading
Posted in Citizens United, Supreme Court
Tagged BCRA, corporate electioneering, corporate political spending, deference by the courts, deference to legislatures, electioneering communications, First Amendment, freedom of the press, identity-based distinctions, judicial restraint, majority opinion, minority opinion