Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Ted Cruz Warns That Dems Are Moving To 'Repeal' The First Amendment [View all]Distant Quasar
(142 posts)in thanks for coming down on my side of an issue, that's just like sending a handwritten thank-you note, right? No, of course not. The two acts have noticeably different practical impacts. Money can corrupt, and speech can't. That's why money and speech are not the same thing, even if they are related in undeniable ways.
It doesn't follow that the government can pass any restriction it wants on how people can use their money to promote their views - just that some such restrictions, as long as they are narrowly tailored, do not necessarily infringe on freedom of speech per se.
In fact, the Supreme Court has acknowledged this. The Court has consistently said that the government has a compelling interest in preventing the corruption or appearance of corruption (which necessarily entails restricting how people can use their money). The problem is that the conservative majority has denied - on no actual evidence - that independent campaign expenditures could possibly contribute to corruption or even its appearance. That to me is very clearly false.