Montana Supreme Court Rebutts 'Citizens United'

[midnight]

(January 1, 2012) Montana's Supreme Court has issued a stunning rebuke to the U.S. Supreme Court's 'Citizens United' decision in 2010 that infamously decreed corporations had constitutional rights to directly spend money on 'independent expenditures' in campaigns.

The Montana Court vigorously upheld the state's right to regulate how corporations can raise and spend money after a secretive Colorado corporation, Western Tradition Partnership, and a Montana sportsman's group and local businessman sued to overturn a 1912 state law banning direct corporate spending on electoral campaigns.

"Organizations like WTP that act as a conduit for anonymously spending by others represent a threat to the political marketplace," wrote Mike McGrath, Chief Justice of the Montana Supreme Court, for the majority. "Clearly the impact of unlimited corporate donations creates a dominating impact on the political process and inevitably minimizes the impact of individual citizens."

The 80-page ruling is remarkable in many respects.

http://www.alternet.org/story/153623/montana_high_court_says_'citizens_united'_does_not_apply_in_big_sky_state?page=entire

[MineralMan]

1. I imagine they can do that on state and local issues. They won't be able to on

national elections, though, especially the presidential election. I'm not sure about House and Senate elections, though.

[elleng]

4. Questionable all around, BUT

very happy to see this, and hope to see more outspoken decisions in States, let the Supremes know how wrong they were!

[MineralMan]

6. Yes, it's a very good thing. I hope it goes national.

All we need is a decent Congress and it can be dealt with.

[MakingSense]

7. Presidential election is not national though

remember you aren't electing the president you are selecting your electorial college representitives.

So if it works at the state level then it works across the board at least within the borders of that state. The company of course could just funnel the funds to a subsidiary in another state and spend the money from there.

[villager]

2. So what happens? This gets challenged and heads eventually to the Supreme Court

..for a revisiting of their "Fascist Money Act" ruling?

which means we need at least one more barely/passable moderate on the bench by the time the case gets there...

[tblue37]

10. All those who insist that they will not vote for Obama because he has disappointed them need

to be reminded that the next president will appoint at least 2 and probably 3 USSC justices, who will then shape our lives for a generation!

Those who thought Republicans and Democrats were the same in 2000 need to be reminded that no Democrat would have put Alito and Roberts on the USSC, and no Republican would have given us Sotomayor or Kagan. In many ways, the USSC has more influence than the president (e.g., Citizens United), so we need to make sure no Republican has the power to appoint Scalia, Thomas, or Roberts clones as the next 2 or 3 USSC justices!

We have Thomas, Scalia, Alito, and Roberts specifically because a Republican was in office when those seats needed to be filled. We must not let another Republican win the WH now, because several justices are ready to retire!

[Uncle Joe]

5. I love this paragraph, kudos to the Montana Supreme Court.

"“While, as a member of this Court, I am bound to follow Citizens United, I do not have to agree with the [U.S.] Supreme Court’s decision,” wrote Justice James C. Nelson, in his dissent. “And, to be absolutely clear, I do not agree with it. For starters, the notion that corporations are disadvantaged in the political realm is unbelievable. Indeed, it has astounded most Americans. The truth is that corporations wield enormous power in Congress and in state legislatures. It is hard to tell where government ends and corporate America begins: the transition is seamless and overlapping.”

Thanks for the thread, midnight.

[elleng]

8. EXCELLENT!

Supremes need to see this.

[midnight]

11. Your welcome.... And thanks for highlighting what we all know to be true...That corporations are

not disadvantaged...

[CanonRay]

9. This is a good thing

If they appeal it may get to the Supreme Court and give them a chance to correct their horrendous mistake. Or if this comes forward from a number of states, it may embarrass them into doing so.