Published on June 27, 2012 | by LawNews

Prof. Daniel Greenwood Examines US Supreme Court’s Refusal to Reconsider Citizens United


In Citizens United, the Supreme Court held, by a five-to-four vote, that the free speech clause of the First Amendment requires legislatures to allow corporations to spend their funds to influence electoral campaigns. Somehow, free speech—originally the protector of the opposition essential to democracy and the critical dissent that defines freedom—was transformed into a license for corruption. This week, the five justices who decided Citizens United refused to reconsider that wrong decision. The Court summarily reversed the Montana Supreme Court, which had held that at least in Montana restrictions on corporate electioneering were essential to limit actual, historical corruption of the democratic process by outside mining interests.

Read the full article on dissentmagazine.org.

Tags: ,

About LawNews

To submit a news story, or request an interview with one of Hofstra Law's faculty experts, please contact Andrew Berman, assistant dean for communications, at andrew.e.berman@hofstra.edu.

Comments are closed.

Back to Top ↑
  • Upcoming Events

    View Full Calendar

  • Videos

  • Archives