Talk About Platner’s Other Perversions and Creepiness; Leave His VA Stuff Out of...
Maine Führer: Graham Platner Wins Dem Primary
So Long, Nancy Mace
Platner Is No Nazi, but Hegseth on D-Day Is; We Get a Lesson...
When Leadership Loses Its Moral Compass
Our Informational World Is Getting Smaller
Kristen Welker Insults President Trump With 'No Evidence' Guff
An Obama-Era Border Crosser
More Money Won’t Fix Our Schools. Mississippi Data Proves It.
College Grads Hurt by H-1B Visas
Fight Night at 1600: The Outrage Industry Meets the Octagon
June Belongs to the Nuclear Family, Not LGBTQ Activists
Sometimes Justice Does Prevail
Karmelo Anthony Has Just Been Handed His Sentence
NJ Moves to Criminalize Interference With Abortion and 'Gender-Affirming Care' Procedures
Tipsheet

Citizens United, One Year On

Citizens United, One Year On
Today is the one-year anniversary of Citizens United v. FEC, the landmark Supreme Court case ruling that found many campaign finance restrictions passed by Congress were unconstitutional. Spending money to support a candidate of your choice is a form of free speech, and protected by the first amendment.
Advertisement

The Left has gone nuts over this court case. They see it as an absolute affront to democracy and the end of our Republic as we know it. (Of course, the Republic endured for over two hundred years before the campaign finance restrictions that the Court struck down were enacted. But we'll ignore that.) They've gone into overdrive trying to overturn the decision, and have started to focus on challenges to that extent. Citizens United has put together a great retrospective video.

Meanwhile, the challenge to maintain free speech runs ever more up against new challenges. The Supreme Court has just agreed to consider a challenge to Arizona's "clean elections" campaign financing laws. Under Arizona's law, candidates get "matching funds" from taxpayers for every dollar that their competitors raise. As Ilya Shapiro at Cato explained, it's worse than normal 'matching' laws:

Advertisement

Related:

CONSTITUTION

the law sweeps still broader: it applies the same matching funds provision to groups that spend independently from any campaign but are nevertheless deemed to be supporting a given candidate. Such “uncoordinated speech” by third parties — speech that, many times, the candidate does not want even if it is thought to be on his behalf — also triggers matching funds for the candidate’s opponent.

As Citizens United celebrates its one-year anniversary, remember that the Left's attempts to stifle free speech are unending, as freedom's defenders must also be.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement