Independent Speech

This morning the Supreme Court summarily affirmed the decision of a 3 judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in Bluman v. Federal Election Commission, upholding the power of government to bar political contributions to parties, PACs, and candidates from non-resident aliens. The decision was no surprise here or elsewhere.

In the nearly two years since the Citizens United decision, the progressive movement has used every avenue it can find to adapt anti-corruption regulation into a force for intimidating corporations out of engaging in independent expenditures.

One of the outcomes of this tactic has been a rise in activist investing.  Taking advantage of SEC regulation, activist shareholders buy the requisite value of stock needed to introduce shareholder proposals and propose burdensome disclosure rules targeting political expenditures.

Reform groups can hem and haw all day about the merits of various disclosure regimes, but at the end of the day, it would be disingenuous not to acknowledge that these proposals are in the service of cultivating political power and control.

Is Montana the nation’s most corrupt state? Are its voters less able to weed out corrupt candidates? The Montana Supreme Court seems to think so.

Professor Hasen, argues in response to this post on the Montana Supreme Court’s gross misinterpretation, or worse, conscious decision to ignore Citizens United in Western Tradition Partnership v. Attorney General, that the Supreme Court’s decision in Citzens United is “disingenuous.” Brad Smith says no – Citizens United. like its forerunner Buckley v. Valeo, is a straightforward application of the First Amendment, establishing categorical principles to try to define when the state may regulate political speech.

The Montana Supreme Court on December 30 launched a headlong frontal assault on the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Citizens United v. FEC. We predict that the U.S. Supreme Court will make quick work of this frivolous and misguided opinion.

CCP Chairman – and the man who as FEC Commissioner first introduced “content standards” into the regulations on coordinated and independent expenditures – explains the current kerfuffle on Crossroads America and the Federal Election Commission.

It’s more or less official: “Colbert has proven that corporate funded speech can spur valuable grassroots activism. That’s pretty much the holding in Citizens United.”