Montana Victory for Free Speech Shows Importance of Judges

June 26, 2012 14:44

[T]he Supreme Court of the United States summarily reversed an opinion of the Montana Supreme Court allowing Montana’s legislature to ban political expenditures paid for by corporations.  – National Review Online


By Stephen M. Hoersting at National Review Online

It should. In reversing the Montana decision, the nation’s high court easily quelled a judicial mutiny — in only 20 lines of text:

In Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, this Court struck down a similar federal law, holding that political speech does not lose First Amendment protection simply because its source is a corporation [citation omitted]. The question presented in this case is whether the holding applies to the Montana state law. There can be no serious doubt that it does.  See U.S. Const., Art. VI, cl. 2.

Progressives no doubt calculated that the best way to get their preferred decision from the Supreme Court on this issue was to have the public on their side.


“Were the matter up to me,” Breyer wrote for his brethren, “I would vote to grant the petition for certiorari to reconsider Citizens United.

Just more evidence, if any were needed, that the stakes in this November’s elections could not be higher. [emphasis added]



Editor’s note: The oft noted comment by Obama and his progressives saying that the court said corporations are people is not true. In Citizens United the court said that people do not lose their first amendment rights even when the form associations such as a union or a corporation.

Help Make A Difference By Sharing These Articles On Facebook, Twitter And Elsewhere: