Bipartisan group of attorneys calling for constitutional amendment v. Citizens United Decision

[Hannah Bell]

Bipartisan Group of Former Attorneys General and Law Professors Calls on Congress to Examine Constitutional Amendment To Reverse Citizens United

As the Supreme Court returns today for its new term, a bipartisan group of law professors and prominent attorneys, including seven former state attorneys general, issued a letter criticizing the Court’s ruling in January in Citizens United v. FEC, which equated corporate spending in elections with free speech rights, and calling on Congress to consider a constitutional amendment to overturn the decision.

Free Speech for People and People For the American Way announced the release of the letter (PDF), which was signed by more than fifty leading law professors and attorneys, including former Massachusetts Attorneys General Frank Bellotti and Scott Harshbarger; former Mississippi Attorney General Michael Moore; former Arizona Attorney General Grant Woods; leading constitutional scholars; and numerous former federal and state prosecutors from across the country.

The diverse group of attorneys, scholars, and public servants call the Citizens United decision “a serious danger to effective self-government of, for and by the American people.” The signatories urge Congress to consider a constitutional amendment to address that danger, noting that “most of the seventeen amendments adopted since the original Bill of Rights have corrected what the American people understood were obstacles to the equal rights of all people to participate in self-government on equal terms.”

Several bills introducing constitutional amendments to overturn Citizens United are under consideration in Congress, including the Edwards-Conyers bill in the House and the Baucus bill in the Senate. In addition, resolutions calling for an amendment to be sent to the states have been introduced in several state legislatures, including California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Washington, Pennsylvania, and South Dakota.




http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2010/10/cant-find-good-place-for-your-political.html

[Enthusiast]

1. There is no doubt that

Citizens United was a frontal assault on our democracy. In this day of widespread secret political alliances one can always know an individual's true allegiance - just ask them if they support Citizens United.

Of course the Teabaggers/Republicans will characterize this amendment effort as an attack on small business, lol. And their followers will believe it!

[harun]

2. We need an amendment that states:

"Congress shall have the power to enforce a separation of Corporations and State. Congress shall have the power to enforce this law through appropriate legislation."

[veganlush]

3. They'd better hurry up..

..what makes people think they're gonna be able to do anything about it after the midterms. Once the repugnants control the agenda, there's gonna be no putting the toothpaste back into the tube..the pussified dems should have done something immediately.

[KharmaTrain]

4. Not Gonna Happen No Way No How...

I truly wish this could be the case, but there's no way a Constitutional Ammendment could survive in this day and age. Do you honestly think there ar 67 votes in the Senate? Really? And then its off to the states...most that will be electing rushpublican legislatures this year (many thanks to the Citizens United slush funds and foreign money). You're asking these people to bite the hand that feeds them. NEITHER party will want to give up this gravy train.

I'm even dubious that there's a majority vote for strong campaign reform...not just the money but the endless political seasons we are now enduring. I'd love to see a system similar to Great Britian where the campaign season is limited to 90 days...no campaigning before. The compressed schedule would make the big bucks less important...MegNut couldn't spend $10gs an hour for 600 days, only for 90. We know most voters really don't start to focus on elections until the final month or two...and this would leave our "legislators" to do something real rare...legislate without the worry about pissing off big money lobbyists.

The other hope is that the high rollers will find their investments aren't bringing back the returns they were hoping for. For all the big money rolling this year, if the GOOP doesn't win, will those who wrote the six and seven figure checks be back in two years? I strongly believe in demonizing those who are using outside money...it's always been a strong selling point to local voters and if this continues, we may even see a voter backlash. But passing any Constitutional Ammendment to do away with Citizens United? Not a chance.

[indepat]

5. Wow, when a bipartisan group opines that a serious danger is created by a ruling in a 5 to 4

majority opinion, what is that bipartisan group saying about the professional conduct of those five? :shrug: