Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

High court voids overall contribution limits (democrats and McCain will go nuts with this one!)
yahoo.com ^ | 4/2/14 | Mark Sherman

Posted on 04/02/2014 7:34:58 AM PDT by cotton1706

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court struck down limits Wednesday in federal law on the overall campaign contributions the biggest individual donors may make to candidates, political parties and political action committees.

The justices said in a 5-4 vote that Americans have a right to give the legal maximum to candidates for Congress and president, as well as to parties and PACs, without worrying that they will violate the law when they bump up against a limit on all contributions, set at $123,200 for 2013 and 2014. That includes a separate $48,600 cap on contributions to candidates.

But their decision does not undermine limits on individual contributions to candidates for president or Congress, now $2,600 an election.

Chief Justice John Roberts announced the decision, which split the court's liberal and conservative justices. Roberts said the aggregate limits do not act to prevent corruption, the rationale the court has upheld as justifying contribution limits.

The overall limits "intrude without justification on a citizen's ability to exercise 'the most fundamental First Amendment activities,'" Roberts said, quoting from the court's seminal 1976 campaign finance ruling in Buckley v. Valeo.

Justice Clarence Thomas agreed with the outcome of the case, but wrote separately to say that he would have gone further and wiped away all contribution limits.

Justice Stephen Breyer, writing for the liberal dissenters, took the unusual step of reading a summary of his opinion from the bench.

Congress enacted the limits in the wake of Watergate-era abuses to discourage big contributors from trying to buy votes with their donations and to restore public confidence in the campaign finance system.

(Excerpt) Read more at finance.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2014; 2016; elections; gop; scotus

1 posted on 04/02/2014 7:34:58 AM PDT by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

Roberts is a little late in trying to prevent corruption in govt!


2 posted on 04/02/2014 7:39:04 AM PDT by Big Mack (I love this country. ItÂ’s the government that scares the crap out of me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

Why are individuals limited but other organizations are not?


3 posted on 04/02/2014 7:39:12 AM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God Bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

Well the candidates already spend 1 billion on the Presidential election. That will be chump change in 2016.


4 posted on 04/02/2014 7:41:59 AM PDT by napscoordinator ( Santorum-Bachmann 2016 for the future of the country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

All of McCain’s work in the 90’s on “campaign finance reform” has now been totally wiped out!

Remember when he said there would be “blood in the water” if he didn’t get a vote on his McCain-Feingold bill? Well they passed it, Bush signed it and O’Connor, Stevens and Souter went along with it. But Roberts and Alito have reversed it!

McCain has the same zeal for “comprehensive immigration reform,” which is why that too needs to be stopped. Anything McCain is for is bad for the country!


5 posted on 04/02/2014 7:42:11 AM PDT by cotton1706 (ThisRepublic.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Big Mack

Roberts is a little late in trying to prevent corruption in govt!
____

Agree, but still better to have him than Kagan or Sotormayor...

2016 is so important in terms of the court...Cannot overstate the importance.


6 posted on 04/02/2014 7:42:48 AM PDT by Tulane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Big Mack

Roberts said the aggregate limits do not act to prevent corruption, the rationale the court has upheld as justifying contribution limits.

That should not even be a consideration. The Supreme Court has totally strayed from whether or not a law is constitutional. Kagan did the same thing regarding the ACA mandate for abortificants. The consideration of whether it is cheaper to pay for insurance or the penalty should not even be part of the discussion.


7 posted on 04/02/2014 7:47:31 AM PDT by sheana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706
(democrats and McCain will go nuts with this one!)

They already are. The liberal line seems to be "That scumbag Roberts is scheming with the Koch brothers to buy a permanent Republican majority!" (and to think Roberts was their best buddy when he upheld the Individual Mandate, I guess the honeymoon is over).

8 posted on 04/02/2014 7:48:47 AM PDT by apillar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

Will this moot the prosecution of Ramesh Ponneru?


9 posted on 04/02/2014 7:52:44 AM PDT by Valpal1 (If the police can t solve a problem with violence, they ll find a way to fix it with brute force)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
That is always the case. Groups, organizations, corporations often have more 'rights' than the individual.

Just look at interest groups and PAC's. Ya can give them unlimited funds, then they turn around and give it whoever politician they want. However, there was/is a limited amount we can give to a politician as an individual.

10 posted on 04/02/2014 7:57:47 AM PDT by Theoria (End Socialism : No more GOP and Dem candidates)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy

Exactly. If people want to contribute, let them do so as individuals. The system we have now is perverted to give outlandish influence to the crony capitalists. Of course the political whores like it this way.


11 posted on 04/02/2014 8:02:57 AM PDT by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2
The system we have now is perverted to give outlandish influence to the crony capitalists. Of course the political whores like it this way.

You left out the labor unions.

12 posted on 04/02/2014 8:13:16 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: apillar

“They already are. The liberal line seems to be “That scumbag Roberts is scheming with the Koch brothers to buy a permanent Republican majority!” (and to think Roberts was their best buddy when he upheld the Individual Mandate, I guess the honeymoon is over).”

Right, they loved it when the Supremes upheld Campaign Finance Reform because it essentially eliminated the republican advantage in fundraising (which was probably McCain’s goal) and allowed the democrats to retake the Congress and the presidency (remember Obama’s fundraising and McCain’s pledge to stay within the limits?).

The Citizens United decision drove them crazy and also prompted Lois Lerner to bear down in the IRS, and republicans and especially conservatives were able to win big in 2010.

I’m sure they are very, very worried about this.


13 posted on 04/02/2014 8:15:29 AM PDT by cotton1706 (ThisRepublic.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

The biggest buyer, if one counts the number of votes bought, is the government itself. Universal suffrage invites this sort of soft corruption, where the government grants money to “the needy,” and the needy in turn vote for more of that.


14 posted on 04/02/2014 8:16:43 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

So the Supremes rule “free speech” trumps campaign finance limits. Let’s hope they also rule that freedom of religion trumps Obamacare.


15 posted on 04/02/2014 8:36:50 AM PDT by Qiviut (Obama: A Caesar at home & a Chamberlain abroad, dividing the country & uniting the world against us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

It is a good thing obamacare has a dedicated pot of untraceable money to pay for propoganda, political campaign ads, and contributions to progressive candidates.


16 posted on 04/02/2014 8:43:19 AM PDT by Organic Panic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

McCain is already certifiable, this will just put the finishing touches on his schizophrenia.


17 posted on 04/02/2014 8:52:21 AM PDT by jazusamo ([Obama] A Truly Great Phony -- Thomas Sowell http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3058949/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

...Bundlers and PACs hit hardest.


18 posted on 04/02/2014 8:52:44 AM PDT by Justa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; cardinal4; ColdOne; ...

> The justices said in a 5-4 vote that Americans have a right to give the legal maximum to candidates for Congress and president, as well as to parties and PACs, without... But their decision does not undermine limits on individual contributions to candidates for president or Congress, now $2,600 an election.


19 posted on 04/02/2014 9:04:35 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Obama is now making Jimmy Carter look like Attila the Hun. /focus/news/3138768/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2
I much rather a private company than the government wield that power. At least we can not buy something and drive a company out of the market. But the government has grown to large and feeds on everything no matter what.
We need government, just a much smaller one with far less of our money or government employees in it.
20 posted on 04/02/2014 10:50:59 AM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God Bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson