Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TomCADem

(17,382 posts)
Thu Mar 24, 2016, 11:05 PM Mar 2016

With the Supreme Court Vacancy, Could Citizens United Be Reversed?

Interesting article in the Atlantic, which recognizes the opportunity to reverse Citizens United, but argues that even with a more liberal judge, the Court would be reluctant to reverse established precedent. However, didn't the Court reverse decades of precedent in the first place when it issued Citizens United in the first place?

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/04/how-to-reverse-citizens-united/471504/

Few supreme court opinions have been as controversial as Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the 2010 decision that struck down limits on corporations’ campaign expenditures, finding them to be an abridgment of free speech. Like most of the Court’s recent campaign-finance rulings, the case was decided 5–4, with Justice Antonin Scalia in the majority. Even before Scalia’s death, Citizens United featured significantly in the presidential primaries. Bernie Sanders had made its negation, through a constitutional amendment, a key goal of—and rationale for—his candidacy. Both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton had condemned the existing campaign-finance system, and Clinton had vowed to appoint “Supreme Court justices who value the right to vote over the right of billionaires to buy elections.”

Now, with a new justice in the offing, the prospect of reversing Citizens United, among other Roberts Court decisions, seems suddenly larger, more plausible: For campaign-finance-reform proponents, the brass ring seems within reach.

* * *
In a powerful dissent in 2014, Justice Stephen Breyer demonstrated how the Court’s recent 5–4 decisions striking down campaign-finance laws are out of step with the Court’s own precedents, thus laying out the logic for a reversal. In theory, he just needs one more vote.

And yet, even if Scalia’s replacement shifts the ideological balance of the Court, the effort to undo Citizens United will still face daunting hurdles. The Court hesitates to overturn any past decision, but it is especially reluctant when a reversal means cutting back on a constitutional right, rather than establishing a new one (as pro-life opponents of Roe v. Wade have learned).

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
2. Obama's current nominee is not likely to vote to overturn it
Thu Mar 24, 2016, 11:36 PM
Mar 2016

I don't think a challenge to it will come up for a few years. We are going to be stuck with it until after the 2020 presidential race, if not longer. I'm not optimistic given the amount of people who are just apathetic or the ones who are plain stupid and think it isn't an important issue.

 

mythology

(9,527 posts)
3. Doubtful, but even if they did, it wouldn't be precident setting
Fri Mar 25, 2016, 12:40 AM
Mar 2016

if the Supreme Court ruling is 4-4 even if it is the resolution of a lower court decision striking down Citizen's United.

TomCADem

(17,382 posts)
4. The Point Is Why Should A Democratic Nominee Respect Citizens United
Sat Mar 26, 2016, 01:19 AM
Mar 2016

Citizens United was a 5-4 vote, and Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan and Breyer have consistently criticized that decision. Why would an Democratic appointee suddenly side with the right wing appointees?

Land of Enchantment

(1,217 posts)
6. Not with the Obama nominee. Bernie would nominate a more progressive appointee and
Sat Mar 26, 2016, 01:36 AM
Mar 2016

has stated that but has said he will support this nominee out of respect for the President.

Bernie's test is Citizen's United. He will not appoint anyone who supports it.

I do not see any change coming if Hillary wins it. I am so disappointed in the swing to the moderate (right) Obama had done that it is chilling. I voted for him, campaigned for him and donated to his campaign. I want my time and money and that part of my soul back.




TomCADem

(17,382 posts)
7. Seriously? Elena Kagan and Sotomayor Vehemently Criticized Citizens United
Sat Mar 26, 2016, 01:56 PM
Mar 2016

Are you seriously suggesting that President Obama's next nominee would side with Roberts, Thomas, Kennedy and Alito as opposed to Sotomayor, Breyer and Ginsburg who dissented in Citizens United, as well as Elena Kagan who has criticized this decision. Also, you do remember that an anti-Hillary Clinton hit piece was the subject of Citizens United? The idea that Hillary was silently cheer leading a corporate funded hit piece against her is just crazy.

Please explain the basis of your theory.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»With the Supreme Court Va...