Harry Reid goes on a nutty Koch brothers rant in 3… 2… 1…

Further loosening the reins on the role of money in politics, the U.S. Supreme Court today struck down restrictions on the grand total that any person can contribute to all federal candidates for office.

Today’s decision left intact the cap of $2,600 per election that a contributor to give to any single candidate for federal office, but it invalidated the separate limit on how much can be contributed to all federal candidates put together — $48,600.

The law was challenged by the Republican Party and an Alabama businessman, Shaun McCutcheon, who argued that the contribution ceilings were an unconstitutional restriction on his free expression.

“It’s about freedom of speech and your right to spend your money on as many candidates as you choose. It’s a basic freedom,” McCutcheon said in bringing the challenge.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-...ics-n69681

Roll Tide!

(04-02-2014 10:11 AM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  Harry Reid goes on a nutty Koch brothers rant in 3… 2… 1…

Reid is going to say the Koch brothers paid off the justices.

Good news. more speech is always better. open the shades and let in a little sunlight.

Good, Obama and Holder can't put Disnesh in jail
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/c...story.html

and this is how a Democracy falls. Through applause.

I can't understand how the liberal wing of the Supreme Court can consistently vote in lock step while totally ignoring the Constitution. Didn't these people take an oath to "..support and defend the Constitution..."? These justices (?) are clearly in the pay of people like George Soros, Tom Steyer and Harvey Weinstein. Shameful how their votes are so easily bought.

This is common sense.

Why can't I donate to as many of those ass holes as I wish?

Would Fascists or Socialists applaud this ruling?

(04-02-2014 11:05 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Would Fascists or Socialists applaud this ruling?

Walk down the hall of your school and tell your fellow teachers about this, see who amongst them applauds and you have your answer.

Why invalidate the overall limit but keep the "per candidate" limit?

We need to merge the two threads.