[EL] Check out 'Citizen conventions' should respond to Citizens United, Harvard la

[JBoppjr at aol.com]

_Click here:  'Citizen conventions' should respond to Citizens United, 
Harvard law professor  suggests_ 
(http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202564277666)  
 
This is a classic example of the frequently distorted description of what  
Citizens United did:  
 
In Citizens United, the Court found that corporations and unions cannot  be 
banned from making independent expenditures to political action committees 
or  candidates.

The subcommittee hearing examined the possibility of a  constitutional 
amendment that would give Congress the authority to regulate  campaign 
contributions by businesses.
 
One reading this would conclude appropriately that CU made  contribution to 
candidates by businesses legal.  Of course, the ruling  itself did not.  
 
And what is so puzzling is why this happens when it is so easy to get it  
right. Jim Bopp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120725/810fb8d3/attachment.html>