3 ms·

I am not a lawyer, but I don't think so. Citizens United didn't rule that money was literally speech, but instead that laws prohibiting the expenditure of mone

by cderwin 10y ago

I am not a lawyer, but I don't think so. Citizens United didn't rule that money was literally speech, but instead that laws prohibiting the expenditure of money on speech (i.e. a political ad) are impermissible impediments on protected speech. Fraud isn't protected speech, and money laundering isn't speech at all, so I don't think the first amendment comes into play at all. And yes, I don't think constitutional protections would apply to a bank simply refusing to be the medium for a financial transaction.

jlj 10y ago
Helpful interpretation, thanks. What about if the expenditure is prohibited by mistake, is not fraud or money laundering, and it gets locked up in bureaucracy indefinitely? In that case it seems like protected speech could be restricted. Anyone know if constitutional law can be applied to quasi-government private organizations? At what point is an industry such as banking so regulated by government that it can't be distinguished from government?