Congress attempts to minimize SCOTUS decision

Looking to minimize the consequences of the Supreme Court’s recent decision allowing corporations to spend significantly larger amounts influencing elections, Congress is taking up legislation to counter some of the ruling’s implications. “It’s one of the most wrongheaded decisions in court history,” Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) told the Los Angeles Times. A bill revealed Friday by Democrats would ban foreign corporations from spending money on U.S. races, with Schumer naming Venezuela-owned Citgo as an example. And in a seeming attempt to embarrass companies who put up negative or controversial ads, the legislation would require CEOs of corporations to appear at the end of advertisements approving their content, much as presidential ads operate now.

Read more here.

5 Comments

Filed under Political Reform, U. S. Supreme Court

5 responses to “Congress attempts to minimize SCOTUS decision

  1. FWIW, I agree with the remarks of the election law
    ‘expert’ quoted in the link. Realistically, all that may, for certain, be done constitutionally in light of the Citizens United decision is to strengthen the disclosure rules. It seems to me that Sen. Schumer conceded as much by his comment that at least the provisions of such bill, if enacted, would be in place for the 2010 elections while the courts considered the law.

    I still hold the position that the only way to get around the decision is by Constitutional Amendment. Mere legislation won’t do it.

    • fnord

      “…would be in place for the 2010 elections while the courts considered the law.”

      What courts? I thought the only way to change this decision (other than the Constitutional Amendment you mention) would be for SCOTUS to do so. They are, after all, the High Court.

      • So it is. Before a case reaches SCOTUS, such as this one involving a federal law, normally it must be filed in U.S. District Court, then appealed to the proper Court of Appeals, then to SCOTUS. This takes time.

        For a state case to reach SCOTUS, it goes through the state judiciary, and reaches SCOTUS upon either appeal or upon SCOTUS granting a <writ of certioary (sp?), commonly referred to as cert. This also takes time.

  2. indypendent

    I really don’t know that much about this issue to state any facts but what I do want is more transparency and accountability.

    I might add, I would like that transparency and accountability before we vote so it is well known to everyone who is paying for what in these campaigns.

  3. tosmarttobegop

    One commenter stated that Corporations were already doing this illegally and all this means is that now it is legal. And will be in the open and can be seen.