Dems Propose Constitutional Amendment to Overturn First Amendment Decision

Democrats in the House of Representatives have introduced a constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court’s controversial Citizens United v. FEC decision made in 2010.

The court ruled 5–4 that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations and overruled an earlier decision that banned corporations from making “electioneering communications.”

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif). In a press release He and his Democratic colleagues introduced the “Democracy For All Amendment” To “overturn legal precedents that have allowed unrestrained campaign spending and dark money to corrupt American democracy.” According to the release, he has introduced constitutional amendments every year since 2013.

“The flow of unrestricted corporate and dark money into our elections has dangerously eroded the American people’s faith in our democracy, and in our government’s ability to deliver for them and their families,” In a press release, Schiff stated. “Citizens United was one of the most egregious enablers of special interest money, but it was only the latest in a long line of Supreme Court cases that opened the floodgates. To truly rein in dark money, we must amend our Constitution.”

Schiff claimed that the amendment would close “legal loopholes” He stated that it allowed “wealthy megadonors, corporations, and special interest groups” To exploit the political system.

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

Schiff stated that the move is made before Jan. 21’s 13th anniversary, which was the Associated Press. said It was taken from a “bitterly divided U.S. Supreme Court.”

According to the AP, the decision was taken “vastly increased the power of big business and labor unions to influence government decisions by freeing them to spend their millions directly to sway elections for president and Congress.”

Federal Election Campaign Act prohibits corporations and labor organizations from using general funds for election communications. It also prohibits speech advocating for candidates in federal elections, including broadcasts by cable or satellite communication, that are made public within 30 days after a primary, or 60 days following a general election. according to the FEC.

 

Demonstrators march in the snow through Lafayette Park, outside the White House, during a rally against the Supreme Court’s decision in 2010 favor of Citizens United, which allows private citizens and corporations to make unlimited donations for political campaigns, in Washington, DC on Jan. 21, 2015. (Nicholas Kamm/AFP via Getty Images).

In January 2008, Citizens United, a non-profit organization, released a film about then-Senator Hillary Clinton, prior to the Democratic Party’s 2008 primary elections.

The group demanded that cable companies pay them to make the film free via video-on-demand services. It planned to make the film available within 30 days of the primaries, but feared it would be covered by the Act’s ban, according to the FEC, which could have subjected them to civil and criminal penalties.

The FEC was argued to be unconstitutional by the group, and the group sought declaratory as well as injunctive relief. The District Court denied the preliminary injunction and granted the Commission’s motion for summary judgment.

The Supreme Court ruled that the courts were competent and recognized their jurisdiction. “required to consider the facial validity” of the Act’s ban in regard to freedom of speech.

The Court ruled that the Act was a speech ban. “political speech must prevail against laws that would suppress it, whether by design or inadvertence.”

It held that Disclaimer and disclosure obligations are required “constitutional as applied to both the broadcast of the film and the ads promoting the film itself, since the ads qualify as electioneering communications.”

Additional Democrat Support

The amendment was proposed by Schiff along with Rep. Dean Phillips, Pramila Jayapal (D.Wash.), Jim McGovern (D.Mass.).).

According to a press release, the amendment would also be available. “address the fundamental flaws underlying the Court’s reasoning in that and an entire line of cases dating back to the 1976 Buckley v. Valeo decision, which prevented meaningful regulation of campaign expenditures by corporations and special interest groups.”

“Thirteen years after the Supreme Court handed down the Citizens United decision, we are still feeling its disastrous effects–and they’re getting worse,” Tiffany Muller is the President of End Citizens United/Let America Vote Action Fund. “Each year, we see more and more dark corporate money pouring into our elections, letting billionaires and corporate America buy influence and power in Washington.”

*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases