The Man Who Took Down Campaign Finance Reform
The conservative lawyer behind the Supreme Court case that will flood elections with corporate cash.
Thursday's Supreme Court decision striking down limits on corporate spending in elections marks the latest in a remarkable string of victories for a Republican lawyer in Terre Haute, Indiana. James Bopp Jr. did not argue Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission before the high court, but the case was entirely his brainchild.
Bopp, the longtime counsel to the anti-abortion group National Right to Life, has now almost singlehandedly obliterated many of the nation's relatively modest restrictions on corporate election spending, including the landmark McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform legislation. And he's done it all in the name of the First Amendment. In 2007, Bopp persuaded the Supreme Court to eliminate limits on corporate funding of television ads in Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, arguing that the rules were an unconstitutional infringement on free speech. A few months later, he represented Citizens United in its battle with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) over its efforts to air a critical documentary about Hillary Clinton on television during the election season—the case that led to Thursday’s major Supreme Court decision.
As with so many of Bopp's cases, few people took the Citizens United challenge seriously in the beginning. During one hearing in early 2008, US District Court Judge Royce Lamberth actually laughed at Bopp for comparing the Citizens United film—which portrayed Hillary Clinton as a European Socialist—to investigative news shows like 60 Minutes. Since then, judges, good government groups and various other political actors have learned that Bopp is not to be laughed at. After the Supreme Court decided to take the case, Citizens United hired renowned high court litigator Ted Olson to handle the oral arguments, but the case bears all the trademarks of Bopp’s handiwork.
Bopp has a knack for finding provisions in campaign finance laws that have been taken for granted for decades as acceptable restrictions on corporate speech. Then, he makes ACLU-like arguments that such rules violate the First Amendment. Part of Bopp's genius lies in his choice of clients. Although his cases ultimately benefit powerful corporations, their public faces are usually small advocacy groups like Wisconsin Right to Life or Citizens United that are seeking to participate in political debate. Perhaps most impressive, he crafts cases that appear persuasive to people who do not share his agenda (he is a staunch conservative and member of the Republican National Committee). As a journalist and civil libertarian, I was deeply conflicted about the Citizens United case. After viewing the Hillary documentary, I thought Americans ought to be able to watch it on television if they wanted to, and was sympathetic to Bopp's argument that the campaign finance rules in this case resulted in censorship. Clearly the Supreme Court was, too.
Not content with blasting 100 years of campaign-finance precedent out of the water, Bopp is taking aim at other established principles of American election law. His firm is currently representing anti-gay marriage forces in Washington State, California and Maine, where he has filed lawsuits challenging basic transparency provisions in those states' election laws. In October, Bopp persuaded the Supreme Court to overturn a Ninth Circuit decision allowing the disclosure of the names of people who signed petitions to put an anti-gay marriage measure on the Washington State ballot. In California, Bopp has sued state elections officials in an attempt to have state donor disclosure rules deemed unconstitutional. Bopp has argued that laws requiring donor names to be made public subjected supporters of Proposition 8—which struck down gay marriage in the state—to harassment that violated their free speech rights. That case is still pending.
Bopp's firm has filed a similar suit in Maine, where the state's ethics and election commission is investigating the National Organization for Marriage for failing to register as a political committee and reveal its donors during its work on a ballot initiative that outlawed gay marriage in that state. As he did in California, Bopp has argued that the disclosure law is unconstitutional. A federal judge disagreed and ordered the National Organization for Marriage to reveal its donors, but Bopp's firm is fighting the decision. That case is likely to also end up before the Supreme Court in the not-so-distant future. As with Citizens United, it's hard to imagine that such a core provision of election law—in this case donor disclosure—could be struck down. But good government groups and campaign finance watchdogs would do well not to underestimate Bopp's power of persuasion.
Comments
AMERICA IS TURNING AROUND
The liberal facists lead by the light skinned negro with no negro dialect unless he chooses and George Soros a corporate troll, whill have met their match this next year.
Throw the commies out, all of them.
You need to fear corporate
You need to fear corporate control just as much as government control.
Both are bad when carried to extremes; individuals have even less control over corporations than government.
Lunatic Post
Your commentary is both irrelevant and pathological. I'll put the discussion back on track.
The following logic may prove to be an adequate foundation for drafting a suitable legislative initiative:
Corporations are not Citizens and therefore, can neither Vote nor Participate in an Electoral Process.
This means Campaign Contributions from Corporations are Illegal.
It also means that Political Propaganda can not be transmitted over Publicly Licensed Airwaves by Corporations.
Furthermore: Corporations are prohibited from performing any act not specified in it's Articles of Incorporation, which must be congruent with the stated purpose and concrete function of the Corporation.
Yes, and now Hugo Chavez now
Yes, and now Hugo Chavez now has greater ability to sway voters, as do the corporate "Bottom Liners" , and "religious delusionalists".
Lame-O...You honestly think
Lame-O...You honestly think that those who weild credible fascist influence in this world are on "Team Liberal." It all seems like a fun game to give you something to gripe about. The Corporate Oligarchs are the only players in town, and you are their cognitively malleable waterboy.
Have you ever even looked up
Have you ever even looked up the word Fascist, much less studied any modern example of it. Not one example of a fascist regime can be found that could even remotely be described as Liberal. They all began in down economic times using Hate Speech/Name Calling as a cover for corporation favoring courts to lower corporate oversight and reduce the rights of ordinary citizens. All in the name of jobs and order!
Now thats rich, any chance
Now thats rich, any chance you might have butted one to many hard heads there pal?
You have nothing to say
Your comments are nothing but sarcasm and name-calling -- empty of any argument whatsoever.
If you want to make a point, then why don't you tell us just who is a "commie" and what evidence or argument you have for that? You can't, because there is no Democrat who is a communist.
If you want the big corporations to make your laws, destroy your rights, send you or your children to wars to defend corporate interests, then by all means celebrate this move to real fascism, represented by the handing over of our democracy to the forces of greed and destruction.
The days of smearing honest men and women with invective such as "commie," ended with the demise of Joe McCarthy, and, sadly for people like you, you will never bring him back again. You are an anachronism.
In the end, you will lose, along with everyone else, because your voice will be diminished by corporate money -- unless you really are empty-headed enough to go along with everything that corporate money will dictate. I admit that most likely you are that mindless -- and that makes you, and those like you, if I may venture a bit of well-justified name-calling myself, sad-act fools and mindless, lazy surrender-monkies. Bend over, dude, because your corporate heros are about to give you what you want.
conservatives = bigoted criminal against humanity
thank you for proving my thesis once more time.
What's a liberal fascist?
What's a liberal fascist? Could you even attempt to specifically define that, let alone ground it in the reality of current American life? Get rid of your labels and start calling things as they are. Get away from your TV and engage in real life America.
FYI, when you use the word "negro" as a proxy for a substantial argument that should clearly relate to the topic at hand, which yours does not, this act removes you of any credibility you already didn't have.
You should really look up the
You should really look up the definition of fascist (and learn to construct a sentence). The Top One Percent love people like you -- too ignorant to understand your own peril.
Grow Up
Liberal facists, light skinned negro and commies. What planet do you live on, obviously your are not from my America. Grow up.. You want to critize the President, then get some education and guts. You are like a barroom drunk yelling incoherent stuff.
Sorry you don't have an education and are too ignorant to join the new world. Yes there is an election in November but you are too ignornt to vote. Things are changing my friends and you left the station without the train.
Go home and pay homage to Glen Beck and leave us alone.
The new year approaching, click in. Let's facelift bar! ===== HT
The new year approaching, click in. Let's facelift bar!
===== http://0845.com/N3u ====
Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33
Handbags(Coach l v f e n d i d&g) $35
Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16
Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30
Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,A r m a i n i) $16
New era cap $15
Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $25
FREE sHIPPING
====== http://0845.com/N3u ====
%$*&*(&(
&&*_(@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
The donkeys are the conservatives
Did you see Obama manhandle those negative, bitter, closed-minded excuses of politicians called Republicans yesterday? I noticed Fox news did not show much of it... but instead had its hacks 'interpret' for the gullables who watch their yellow journalism.
Why are these people so ignorant? They can't imagine a better society?
"If the American people ever
"If the American people ever allow private banks
to control the issue of their money,
first by inflation and then by deflation,
the banks and corporations that will
grow up around them (around the banks),
will deprive the people of their property
until their children will wake up homeless
on the continent their fathers conquered." Thomas Jefferson.
You are a blind fool (FU*K OBAMA). you let an agenda get propagated upon you without you even knowing it. Learn your history and what this country was founded on not what the politicians bankers and corporations tell you.
Isn't it perpetually curious
Isn't it perpetually curious that those like FU*K OBAMA, who all consider themselves holier-than-thou "conservatives," are completely ignorant of the doctrines the Founding Fathers -- but never hesitate to drop the FF bomb. (Not their actual names, of course; Palin couldn't even name one when asked by Glen Beck).
The sad thing is F*^KOBAMA
The sad thing is F*^KOBAMA now doubt attends some religious ceremony every sunday, a CNO (christian in name only) that believes his idiology trumps Obama's due to his women and gay rights agenda, and worse, is God inspired and protected. Am I correct F$@#OBAMA??
Lets just say that (FU*K
Lets just say that (FU*K OBAMA), likes to speak outa the body part they sit upon.
The Ability of this 'lawyer' lies in the seating of specific bodies where they count the most. I could have predicted the 5-4 verdict. It has been that way since 2000, and will remain that way for years to come.
Now if this 'lawyer' allowed corporate donations in exchange for the removal of lobbyists in DC, I would have gone for that.
The people are up aginst goliath, their own government, and the hacks who have nothing better to do with their talents or beliefs.
All of the forces of the
All of the forces of the Republican party were put to work to prevent President Obama from accomplishing any real change. The insincere positioning of their spokespeople to attack President Obama personally in the media and to attack ALL of his initiatives is disgraceful. I am an independent who will never again vote for a Republican. Maybe Mrs. McCain will never vote Republican again either!
The American people are educated by the big brands and big business and big business media to behave as "sheep" and be herded into opposing points of view that results in a government that can't get anything done because our representatives and senators are always running for the next election.
The government-corporate alliance of course would be protected by The Supreme Court who protect big business interests by way of thirty years of case law that favors big business at the expense of the rights of individuals under The Constitution of the United States.
I hope the President continues to take Wall Street and the bankers to the table to negotiate better control over the influence of Wall Street on Main Street but this was a victory today for Wall Street!
Maybe nothing ever changes and our democracy is just an illusion nourished by those who stand to gain from the illusion that our government works for all of the people and not just those at the top of the financial pyramids?
Well Said -- Best Post
You wrote a model of well-reasoned, accurate, and yet passionate commentary. I'm saving it, as such. Great post.
Overturn Santa Clara vs.
Overturn Santa Clara vs. Southern Pacific
Look it up
Santa clara was a tax dispute.
Enclosed part of letter that was recently send to Mr. Obama and our Attorney general.
It all started with a small tax dispute case, Santa Clara County V Southern Pacific Railroad. and a little bit of court shenanigan by a court clerk named Bancroft Davis
Who had his own agenda, because he had served as president to the board of directors for The Newburg & New York Railroad Co. What in blazes he was doing there as a court clerk to begin with is unknown.
Anyway, in the preamble to the case, Chief Justice Morrison Waite said “We can all agree that equal protection under the law applies to these corporations as well.” After the case was decided, the foot notes were put together by none other than a railroad man who took it upon himself to include the equal protection under the law quote from the preamble as part of the summary judgment handed down. Its all the more amazing considering that the case wasn’t about equal protection at all. In fact the court skirted the issue altogether.
With that small act Mr. Davis, opened a gargantuan can of worms that spawns the corruption of government officials and all forms of sordid affairs too numerous to mention.
The immutable facts are …corporations exist and do business by the good will of the state. A corporation cannot exist without the consent and authority of the state. They can’t hold elective office, they can’t be sworn as citizens, nor can they be arrested. And most importantly they don’t enjoy the right to vote.
If they can’t be sworn in, hold office, be arrested and can’t vote, tell us how did they get the right to petition the government to redress a grievance?"
This legal history regarding
This legal history regarding viewing corporations as people is an important post. All should read it and recommend it. Thanks to the author.
Amazingly, the notion that
Amazingly, the notion that corporations are individuals is included only as dicta* in Santa Clara, and was erroneously included in the published opinion by a clerk although it was actually nothing more than an offhanded comment by a justice.
(*Dicta is peripheral language included in an opinion that has no bearing on the legal issues at bar, and are thus supposed to be given no precedential value.)
Hmmm
So if mega corporations can be viewed as people in the eyes of the law, then doesn't that imply that they have to respect the rights of other people, including their employees?
-I'm reminded of the time that the church of stop shopping went to disneyland to protest our rampant consumer spending in their documentary "what would jesus buy". They were told by security that their first amendment right to freedom of speech didn't apply on private property. Would this be any different now?
-What happens when a large company pulls a factory out of a town in which its the primary source of employment? Would people be able to sue for reparations for the emotional damages done if a town falls apart and the people can't economically recover?
Oh so not supreme..
Looks like voting has become an obsolete option as a mean for change
Try telling that to the
Try telling that to the people of Massachusetts, numbnuts. Their 'obsolete option' vote just killed the disastrous health care bill that was in danger of being rammed down the throats of the American people.
@PeterM. That is another
@PeterM.
That is another problem altogether. I am talking about the giving away of the elections to the highest bidder. And health care reform, yes, was disastrous in the sense that Obama and his corrupt friends bowed down to the insurance companies.
But why would I care, I will never vote again in this so called democracy
Peter's reaction is exactly
Peter's reaction is exactly what will help the country succumb to fascism. Democracy is a struggle - far too many have suffered and died attempting to keep it alive to deserve such a sniveling reaction. Try reading some of the letters written by Civil War combatants, from both sides, you might manage to find a reason to honor the blood spilled for this country. Not to mention the blood being spilled right now - and for what, to defend corporate greed? The least anyone can do is vote. There's a lot more to do than that, starting with making an honest attempt to determine what's true.
Investment Opportunities Abound
Am I the only one who is amazed by how little it really costs to buy political outcomes?
A few hundred thousand here, a few million there, placed in the hands of key politicians can result in billions or trillions in government benefits. Hand-outs, stimulus dollars, regulatory forbearance or favorable contracts are just incredibly cheap. Today, SCOTUS formally declared the nation's legislators open for business.
A new bull market is set to emerge, and this kind of leverage makes Madoff and the banksters look like pikers.
I recommend that all freedom-loving Americans with an ounce of entrepreneurial spirit invest all available resources in top-drawer lobbying firms which can convert very modest corporate outlays into almost limitless wealth.
The Supreme Court has ruled. Now it's time for the market to speak, and it will. Without the likes of Hill & Knowlton and other K-Street stalwarts in your portfolio you might as well stuff your money in a mattress. Act now - operators are standing by.
Opening the floodgates to
Opening the floodgates to corporate contributions is 180 degrees in the wrong direction. Our regulators and elected officials are already "captured" by Wall St. and lobbyists. This just added another nail to the coffin. Obama deserves blame because he campaigned on change, and delivered the same "good old boys" network. The Massachusetts election is a clear example of the Democrats ambivalence about change...They knew that 60th seat was critical and they gave it away....
The pendelum now swings back to the Republican version of cronyism, which is identical to the Democrat version except the suits wear red ties....
This is disgusting
If we all understand this to
If we all understand this to be true, is it even plausible that the Activist Five at the court did not understand? And if they did understand, can this decision be seen as anything but institutional terrorism?
Rather than assign blame to the inane Supreme Court ruling or the Big Spenders' lawyer who won the case, let's blame ourselves. Complain, complain all we might, we haven't stopped our free market loving representatives participating in mutually beneficial business enterprises with corporate carnivores. They continue apace fattening their campaign chests; taking favors; expense paid junkets or special loans to buy a manse in Ireland. In return, they will scratch their special interests' backs. We, the constituency, are not incensed enough to put our collective mouth to the ears of senators and congresspersons at both state and national levels and shout out "You work for us!" Frank Capra put that exclamation in the can when Mr Smith discovered of, by and for the people ideals were laughably naive by Washington's SOPs.
Corprate "Personhood"
In as much as money equates with access to power, to that same degree it does not equal freedom of speech. When you conservative fools have brought our once great nation down to ashes & ruins similar to the Third Reich, you'll get what you deserve. More's the shame that the rest of us will be dragged down with the likes of these corporate shills.
Not necessarily -- but we
Not necessarily -- but we must take action. One of the most perplexing things I've observed is that only the far right and the far left ever actually take action, leaving the "middle of the line" if you will open to sneak runs such as this.
The quandary we face as a society is how to persuade those who jealously defend their democratic right to NOT take action to protect their own interests, TO take action to protect their own interests. I strongly suspect most of us reading these comments are guilty. I know I haven't been as vigilant and active as we all must be, especially considering the greedy, power hungry money interests (enabled by nearly all elected officials) in control of our lives.
SCOTUS decision to legalize Fascism.
The complete legalization of Fascism occurred today. For those that do not understand the definition of it:
NOUN: 1. Fascism a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government. fascistic (f-shstk)
Here is Socialism, not what we had or will ever have, Obama or not.
NOUN: so·cial·ism
Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.
NOUN: Democracy
pl. de·moc·ra·cies
Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
A political or social unit that has such a government.
The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.
Majority rule.
The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.
Right-wingers will celebrate this as a victory for America because they think with their a**es not their brains. For the Christians that think this country was established by their religion of Christ, they are wrong as this is the Confirmation of Money over People. If we thought we had seen bad legislation before now, this will make your head swim!
Democracy appears to be what we had and those days are over now Wal-mart, Coke, Halliburton, Xe and however many corporations there are running the world and America will give us what we want like it or not. Maybe forever!
Democracy. That's one a'
Democracy. That's one a' them there fureign words, ain't it? French, I'll bet. Them people don't even own guns.
Oh Well....
So much for Democracy, it was fun while it lasted.
Oh, and you Conservatives. Twenty years from now you're going to be sitting around with your thumbs up your nose wondering "how'd dat happen?" Congrats, you've given away the county that once belong to
We The People.
And, what exactly have you
And, what exactly have you done to help preserve democracy, lately? Yeah, me too. And probably everyone else reading these comments.
Face it, folks. We can't rely upon our elected officials to act in our interests any longer. We must all -- individually and collectively -- take action. I don't know what, exactly, but we need to start asking ourselves that question -- constantly.
And if we once again get lazy and snooze, John Roberts and his Fascist Five will next rule that anyone who CRITICIZES a corporation is an "enemy of the state." Don't think it can happen? I'll bet you didn't think Citizens United could happen until last week.
You just never know, but you can guess...
As it already seemed to be true that "our country" had been poked around, probably since day one, with sticks by stockholders (most of whom were oblivious to what was going on in the companies that they owned - I have a 401 K, so I'm one of them), maybe (just maybe) taking the flimsy leash off will just make it that much clearer to everyone what is really going on, and we can all grow up and forget about that silly patriotism that the corporations used to have to pretend to care about so they could get people to buy certain things (like invasions). Maybe it will be more relaxing when they don't have to hide their money behind tea-baggers and the other astroturf organizations. The pro-Illegal abortionists (the correct name for the 'right to lifers') may also be surprised at what is going to hit them. Good luck, values voters!
Activist Judges
I want to know where the outcry over Ativist Judges from the Right is now? I agree this ruling is a slap in the face to the Constitution and all Americans. Corporations (or any business for that matter) are not mentioned in the Constitution. Corporations are NOT people, no matter what Roberts says, and Corporate Executives and Boards of Director already get their single "one man, one vote". They don't deserve another. Long live Government of the people, by the Corporations, and for the Corporations!
Solution
Let me get this straight...Up until yesterday There was never a case granting corporate person hood to pieces of paper. The right by corporations to lobby the Government to reddress a greivance has never been granted or littigate in court. Corporations took this right by force. The facts are these, Corporations
Can't be sworn in court,
Can't hold public offfice,
Can't be arrested,
and Can't vote.
When corporations can physically do the above then, they should have the right to lobby. Until then all form of Corporate lobbyists should be banned. Period.
Predictable
This is disgraceful but predicatable considering the makeup of the court. It gives an "easy out" to our congressmen who have given lip service to campaign finance reform for years.
It's just one more win for the Conservative agenda determined to hand over control of OUR government and its tax revenues to the Corporate Elite.
Yeah, and the most maddening
Yeah, and the most maddening thing is that most of the people who vote "conservative" are actually damaged by "conservative politics." In a way, I truly admire the Republicans for having found a voter base that appears to be too dumb to know they're voting against their own interests. Unfortunately, it is precisely those voters who are most susceptible to misleading corporate-sponsored advertising.
Free speech?
Contrast this ruling with the kid from Alaska and his "Bong hits for Jesus" banner...
Welcome to the Corporate States of America
The corporatization of America has been going on for a long while, it accelerated with the Reagan admins beginning deregulations of anything holding back our poor beleagured corporations. So many of our laws now favor big business thanks to corporate lobbyists and greedy and/or weak kneed politicians who park their ethics at the door before entering it's halls. Let me recommend some reading material ,'Shock Doctrine' by Naomi Klein. I'm not sure what the solution is or if it is even possible to take back our government at this late stage, but it sure isn't the conservative republican way which seems to think that all big business is good.
"Fascism should more
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." Benito Mussolini
And we all know how well Mussolini did as a Fascist dictator.. Nuff said!
shit stain
This schmuck needs to be beaten down.
butthead pro is a sh!t stain on the carpet of life
your one liners equal your under-developed brain from which you sit on.
one would guess that you are a ditto head or worse spreading hate on behalf of corporations like FOX and Clear Channel. Are you a board member?
Post new comment
MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback
We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.
