Subject: Re: [EL] 12 Months After: The Effect of Citizens United
From: "Scarberry, Mark" <Mark.Scarberry@pepperdine.edu>
Date: 1/19/2011, 2:48 PM
To: Frank Askin <faskin@kinoy.rutgers.edu>, Sean Parnell <sparnell@campaignfreedom.org>, Bill Maurer <wmaurer@ij.org>, "election-law@mailman.lls.edu" <election-law@mailman.lls.edu>

Again it's necessary to say that lots of human beings who can't vote have 1st Amendment rights, including minors, aliens, and people who've been disenfranchised due to criminal convictions. And lots of associations are considered by everyone to have 1st Am. Rights even though they can't vote. We can argue about whether particular kinds of associations should have 1st Am. Rights, but an association's lack of voting rights cannot be dispositive.
 
Mark Scarberry
Pepperdine

-----Original Message-----
From: election-law-bounces@mailman.lls.edu [mailto:election-law-bounces@mailman.lls.edu] On Behalf Of Frank Askin
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 2:03 PM
To: Sean Parnell; Bill Maurer; election-law@mailman.lls.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] 12 Months After: The Effect of Citizens United

I agree that the first Amendment prohibits the government from
interfering with the inherent rights of citizens. I just don't consider
corporations "citizens." If they were they could vote.  FRANK




Prof. Frank Askin
Distinguished Professor of Law       and Director
Constitutional Litigation Clinic
Rutgers Law School/Newark
(973) 353-5687

_______________________________________________
election-law mailing list
election-law@mailman.lls.edu
http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law