• expatriado@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    They always give these draconian laws positive sounding names. Also, all that disposable money could’ve be used for social programs through taxation

      • GTKashi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        They appear to be mistaking the shorthand for the Supreme Court ruling to be the name of a law. In fairness, bills do often have overly patriotic names that hide their paradoxical purposes.

        • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          Well the same principle is at play here, since Citizens United is a deceitful name for an astroturfed, billionaire-funded organization that had absolutely no involvement from ordinary citizens.

  • Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    So let’s see Kamala’s plan to end this bullshit… Obviously Trump wouldn’t, but Kamala might if we push enough

    • crystalmerchant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Lmao this take that Kamala is somehow immune to the realities of our political financing structures makes no sense to me

      • Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Not immune, and not calling for her to abstain… But she could easily say she wants to change the system and how. It’s not even controversial and would get her plenty of points from the left to the center.

  • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    Thanks a lot John Roberts and Sam Alito for fucking up our politics. Citizens United may be the worst Supreme Court decision since the Civil War

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      There’s a conservative group trying to use Dred Scott as a precedent to disqualify Kamala Harris. The civil war never ended, it just went cold.

  • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    Republicans don’t want to get rid of it because it helps them against Democrats. Democrats don’t want to get rid of it because it helps them lock out progressives. We’re stuck with it.

    • aubeynarf@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      How would the Democrats “get rid of” a supreme court decision?

      Proponents of which party brought the case? Appointees of which party were in the deciding majority on the court?

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        How would the Democrats “get rid of” a supreme court decision?

        Stacking the courts and bringing another case. Or an amendment.

        So like I said, we’re stuck with it.

  • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    y’all come on now, just cause they donated a couple billion bucks does not mean their opinion matters more than an average citizen does it?

  • lennybird@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    After a certain point, they’re just going to cut out the middle-man and say Money = Votes and allow you to bid or hold shares in the office of the President.

    Citizens United and SpeechNow fucked us. Until these are overturned, along with the Electoral College and FPTP abolished, dark days are ahead for our Democracy.

    • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      At which point we the people would be morally and legally obligated to make that office uninhabitable.

      There is always an answer. Just not always a civilized one.

  • AidsKitty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s funny people believe before citizens united that money didnt run politics. America is an oligarchy ,has been my entire life, and always will be. It’s not a bad system if you learn about it. Lots of opportunities if you are willing.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      The entire point of the law they struck down was to take money out of politics. Yes we know money has been a problem.

    • kewjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      America is an oligarchy ,has been my entire life, and always will be.

      Are you over 200 years old? government used to break up monopolies. citizens united probably wasn’t the beginning but it sure did streamline the corruption and legalize the purchase of politicians. Anyways, normalizing apathy probably isn’t going to help the situation.

  • huquad@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Pretty sure I might be on this list. Gave $20 not too long ago, so I’m about to buy some laws.