Justice Samuel Alito Has Some Things He'd Like to Say...

[Doc418]

Alito was right for showing his displeasure with Obama. The ruling affirms the first amendment right of citizens that have pooled their rights to create a corporation. The President's hostile views towards the first amendment is just right down scary, and who is allowed to have free speech rights is right down scary.

[xbluebells]

We have been so lucky to survive as a planet and species as long as we have. This ruling has gone too far. Anything is fair game shrouded in money. But will there be world left after this? Money will fight and flow, never-ending! Would we be comfortable if other NATIONS ruled Likewise. Hey maybe it is not so bad??/!! Please read the Book, 1984! Is has arrived. Human voices please speak. Search on YouTube for Corporations aren't People. There is a viral video contest.

[dezznutz1001]

If you are a Personfor the American Way, then you should nto be bashign Alito, but the liberal Dems on the court who take away our freedoms almost daily. i see Dems do this same stuff, but 10 times worse and 10 times more deceptive

[LarcheOsborne]

There are exactly three Democrats on the Supreme Court. They lack the numbers to take away freedoms even if they wanted to, which they don't. A majority formed from a total of nine justices are required. The Democrats and one liberal Republican (Stevens) support more freedom for Americans. Unfortunately, they are consistently out voted by the 5 conservative justices, two of whom (Scalia and Thomas) publicly state that Americans have too many rights (continued)

[LarcheOsborne]

Scalia has taken strong measures to reduce our rights -- we have lost several in opinions he has drafted. Thomas is just as bad, but he is often too reactionary even for the other conservatives

[davidpark68]

To all you people who think this was brought on by Republicans, your wrong

watch?v=viUokrVXwPg

skip ahead to 15:35

Listen to the truth

it started with a Michael Moore documentary / Ad attacking Bush (Fahrenheit 911). when Citizens United did the same thing with 'Hillary the Movie' ......... Wiki "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission"

watch?v=rUdFaIYzNwU

Just means you'll have to research a candidate & not base your decision on media spin.

[jdersam]

i love how the guy in this video so casually says that its good billions of dollars will flow into campaigns. nothing wrong with corporations buying off congressmen/women. This goes to show you dumb brain washed conservatives what the conservative movement is today. Its not about the little guy, the farmer, the working man, its about the rich and the powerful trying to totally take over government. I can't believe the people on here who are saying this SC ruling was good. So sad and scary.

[crazypaul34]

Our court system is worthless, just like this bastard.

[substanti8]

"The Court's blinkered and aphoristic approach to the First Amendment may well promote corporate power at the cost of the individual and collective self-expression the Amendment was meant to serve. It will undoubtedly cripple the ability of ordinary citizens, Congress, and the States to adopt even limited measures to protect against corporate domination of the electoral process. Americans may be forgiven if they do not feel the Court has advanced the cause of self-government." -- Justice Stevens

[NakedWombat666]

Alito - how can you POSSIBLY say unchained regulations on corporations will not lead to them being out of control?!?! This nation was almost bankrupt because of financial deregulation.

The Legacy of Bumbling Bush and Chickenhawk Cheney lives on....

[JeremyHumboldt]

Yup, he was a great pick for the Supremes. Thank you George Bush.

[ColonPal]

Yeah -- if you like the idea of Corporations running our Government and Country instead of 'We the People'. Alito demonstrates that buying off politicians by whomever pays the most is the name of the game, not the will of American Citizens. Weird how Conservatism has become what it originally despised.

Apparently, you support this.

[classicallady]

Will start again ... The man is nothing but a puppet, maneuver through INTERESTS his minions and dazzled by power. LOSING THE BIGGEST OPPORTUNITY OF HIS LIFE: STFU

[substanti8]

The dissent by Justice Stevens is wonderful -- possibly one of the best opinions of his career. He carefully deconstructs the judicial errors by the corporate lackeys in the majority. I'll post excerpts here later tonight.

[LarcheOsborne]

Justice Stevens is not so liberal as I am, but I admire the balance of his jurisprudence. Justice Stevens is the last of the true Republicans to devote his career to serving the people instead of promoting reactionary activism. He is the only Republican to show the courage, truth, and idealism that Lincoln brought to his once noble party. It is unfortunate that this last of the true Republicans is soon to retire. It will prove difficult to find a worthy replacement. I, for one, will miss him

[LarcheOsborne]

From a comment on the ABA Online Journal

"Thus, ... Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc., Gazprom

Marketing & Trading USA Inc and PetroChina International (America), Inc.,

being domestic corporations, all have equal free speech rights relating to

U.S. elections as traditional U.S. corporations ... (and it is questionable how "American" even these corporations are, as

all multi-nationals are partially owned by foreign nationals and typically

have foreign nationals as board members and senior officers)"

[substanti8]

Proponents of the ruling argue that it does not affect the existing prohibition on expenditures by foreign individuals:

law.cornell. edu/uscode/2/441e.html

However, that law is supposed to be enforced by the Federal Election Commission:

fec. gov/pages/brochures/statefed.s­html

The FEC is the same toothless agency that has allowed our public airwaves to be hijacked for private profit -- particularly during elections. That is exactly why ...

[substanti8]

... money must be considered "speech" during campaigns.

Having done such a horrible job in protecting the public interest with respect to broadcast licensing, the FEC will now supposedly be our last defense against foreign influence in elections.

The argument by the proponents depends on that ridiculous premise.

[dezznutz1001]

So what, we dont even own America even more! Maybe we should change or politcking style to that of the Chinese!!! LOL

[substanti8]

law. cornell. edu/supct/html/08-205.ZX.html

"It is an interesting question 'who' is even speaking when a business corporation places an advertisement that endorses or attacks a particular candidate. Presumably it is not the customers or employees, who typically have no say in such matters. It cannot realistically be said to be the shareholders, who tend to be far removed from the day-to-day decisions of the firm and whose political preferences may be opaque ..."

[substanti8]

"... to management. Perhaps the officers or directors of the corporation have the best claim to be the ones speaking, except their fiduciary duties generally prohibit them from using corporate funds for personal ends. Some individuals associated with the corporation must make the decision to place the ad, but the idea that these individuals are thereby fostering their self-expression or cultivating their critical faculties is fanciful." -- Justice Stevens (Section IV, Part 1, paragraph 4)

[substanti8]

law. cornell. edu/supct/html/08-205.ZX.html

"All of the majority's theoretical arguments turn on a proposition with undeniable surface appeal but little grounding in evidence or experience, 'that there is no such thing as too much speech.' [quoting Scalia] If individuals in our society had infinite free time to listen to and contemplate every last bit of speech uttered by anyone, anywhere; and if broadcast advertisements had no special ability to influence elections apart from the ..."

[substanti8]

"... merits of their arguments (to the extent they make any); and if legislators always operated with nothing less than perfect virtue; then I suppose the majority's premise would be sound. In the real world, we have seen, corporate domination of the airwaves prior to an election may decrease the average listener's exposure to relevant viewpoints, and it may diminish citizens' willingness and capacity to participate in the democratic process." -- Justice Stevens (Sec. IV, Part 1, paragraph 12)