The Supreme Court made the right call

Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a law, limiting corporate and union spending on political ads, is unconstitutional. The court’s decision, in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, has been widely criticized by those who feel that unbridled spending by corporations and unions will thwart and distort the political process.

Contrary to what has, frequently, been reported, the Supreme Court did not extend individual free speech rights to corporations and unions. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides: “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech.” The First Amendment protection is not limited to individual speech. Clearly, associations of citizens have First Amendment rights and the court found no basis for excluding associations, with a corporate or union form, from similar First Amendment protection.

What basis could there possibly be for drawing such a line? Some individuals have more resources to spend on political ads than most corporations or unions. Should they also be banned from financing political ads? Should there be limits on what associations such as political parties, AARP, the Sierra Club, etc. can spend for political ads? And many media “corporations” promote their individual political agendas. Should these media “corporations” enjoy First Amendment rights while other “corporations” are denied similar rights?

If you read the decision carefully, I think you will agree the Supreme Court got it right when it refused to go down the slippery slope of limiting free speech.

LOU GOODNESS

Sagle