• Ulvain
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wasn’t that the whole crux of Citizens United?

      • FaeDrifter@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        36
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        CU vs FEC was specifically about campaign financing, but yeah basically ruled that organizations like corporations are protected by 1A, and money counts as free speech.

        Which is obviously bullshit on every level, but just one way that a SCOTUS with a few corrupt individuals can destroy democracy for an entire country.

        • Ulvain
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          And that was under an overall-not-that-horrible president and with a somewhat-reasonably-not-corrupt supreme court, the next years will be a-ok I’m sure

        • nybble41@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          They ruled that people acting together have all the same rights that they would have acting individually, and that preventing someone from spending money on producing and promoting their speech effectively prevents them from being heard. Which are both perfectly true, common-sense statements.

          • FaeDrifter@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            They ruled that people acting together have all the same rights that they would have acting individually

            Bullshit, corporations are not “people acting together”, they’re autocratic command structures where one or few people hold all the power.

            preventing someone from spending money on producing and promoting their speech effectively prevents them from being heard

            Also total bullshit, unless you agree that allowing people to be poor is a violation of the first amendment, because being poor effectively prevents them from being heard. Which you won’t.

            Which are both perfectly true, common-sense statements

            I’m already confident you don’t have a single ounce of common sense in your empty head after reading those two sentences.

          • FaeDrifter@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            They ruled that people acting together have all the same rights that they would have acting individually

            Bullshit, corporations are not “people acting together”, they’re autocratic command structures where one or few people hold all the power.

            preventing someone from spending money on producing and promoting their speech effectively prevents them from being heard

            Also total bullshit, unless you agree that allowing people to be poor is a violation of the first amendment, because being poor effectively prevents them from being heard. Which you won’t.

            Which are both perfectly true, common-sense statements

            I’m already confident you don’t have a single ounce of common sense in your empty head after reading those two sentences.

    • Mango@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Corporations are people and there should be a jail for them and a gallows.

    • Murdoc
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      In reality, no, you’re right. Legally though, they are. And we are second class citizens.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      I disagree. If you think USA today or any other news outlet shouldn’t have free speech then why bother with free speech to begin with.