What cost political involvement and speech?

October 26, 2009 12:46 PM

How should the US Supreme Court rule on the issue of whether the First Amendment preludes campaign finance limits on political speech? And if they should rule that the First Amendment wins, what of the emerging issue about whether those who sign political initiatives or contribute politically can be shielded from disclosure?
posted by bearwife (8 comments total)

I don't think you understand how this works.
posted by EarBucket at 12:48 PM on October 26, 2009

ask a mod to move this question to askmetafilter. But either way, you may want to reword it so it isn't deliberately staging a debate instead of seeking an answer
posted by Think_Long at 12:49 PM on October 26, 2009

No she really doesn't.
posted by gman at 12:49 PM on October 26, 2009

AskMeFi?

Should rule: corporations aren't people and aren't entitled to First Amendment protections.

Will rule: "Of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations."
posted by longdaysjourney at 12:49 PM on October 26, 2009

I think that SCOTUS should rule that the use of the banhammer in situations like these violates neither the 1st nor the 8th Amendment, but is outside of the reach of the commerce clause.
posted by allen.spaulding at 12:49 PM on October 26, 2009 [1 favorite]

The search for the missing link continues.
posted by buzzman at 12:50 PM on October 26, 2009 [2 favorites]

Well, I did something wrong. I tried to link in two articles, one on the Hilary:the Movie Supreme Court case, and a more recent one from today on the court's decision to seal names of signers of R-71, a Washington state initiative on gay partner rights.
posted by bearwife at 12:51 PM on October 26, 2009

Those links in your post aren't working.
posted by rokusan at 12:52 PM on October 26, 2009