4 ms·

I'd rather imagine a world where Citizens United was decided differently and this donation wasn't legal in the first place.

• aksss 4y ago
  You're assuming the money wouldn't have gotten there anyway, which I'm not sure is a good assumption. Also, remember Citizens United was about publishing a movie critical of a political candidate just before the election. I'm not sure a world where the government forbids publishing about political candidates is a great alternate reality, either.
  • School-Cotton 4y ago
    That world isn't imaginary: it exists in plenty of other democracies and they are doing fine. (Candidates in France for example are publicly funded and there are rules about how much can be spent to promote particular candidates).
  • fn_bb_sqr_pnts 4y ago
    that's a very incomplete view of Citizens United - the specific issue was not that it was published before an election - it was that paid for by a non-profit organization (Citizens United is a PAC). individuals are allowed to publish a movie, or view on their own w/o prohibition. Corporations and non-profits were not granted that right. Citizens United reversed that law, allowing corporations and non-profits (mostly PACs) to be able to express more political views. It's not crazy to think that organizations are not a person and therefore shouldn't be afforded rights that were intended for actual individual human beings.