Supreme Court weighs Republican appeal to end limits on party spending in federal elections

https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-campaign-finance-republican-spending-limits-0381e78b1e8a8da0e49f5b55b543894e

The Supreme Court is considering a Republican-led drive, backed by Donald Trump’s administration, to overturn a quarter-century-old decision and erase limits on how much political parties can spend in coordination with candidates for Congress and president.

A day after the justices indicated they would overturn a 90-year-old decision limiting the president’s power to fire independent agency heads, the court is revisiting a 2001 decision that upheld a provision of federal election law that is more than 50 years old.

Democrats are calling on the court to uphold the law.

179 points · 23 comments · view on lemmy.world

23 Comments

Pat_Riot@lemmy.today · 53 pts · 278d (1 reply)

Jesus Christ it's hard not to downvote headlines like this out of anger.

Kronusdark@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 277d

They need a new “hate it, but more people should see this” button.

TrickDacy@lemmy.world · 34 pts · 277d (5 replies)

How the fuck can anyone still pretend that our system even attempts to reflect the will of the people? Money in politics is a horrendous issue already. Sure let's fucking make it worse because the oligarchs want that

lunelovegood@ttrpg.network · 6 pts · 277d

Bread & Circus

It's football season~

mika_mika@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 277d

Because there was a candidate who ran an inspirational platform against money in politics amongst other populist issues, and he was stomped down twice. Because of this people will feel they have no choice but to spit on anyone that criticizes the DNC and will blame their poor candidates and wasted votes on left purity tests and by falling for propaganda.

nightwatch_admin@feddit.nl · 3 pts · 277d (2 replies)

42% still supports him

TrickDacy@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 277d (1 reply)

So instead of answering the rhetorical question, you just thought you'd remind me of the horrible world we live in. Cool.

nightwatch_admin@feddit.nl · 0 pts · 277d

Truly sorry, good person.

danc4498@lemmy.world · 34 pts · 277d

We wouldn’t have these justices if it weren’t for massive amounts of money in our elections. So it checks out.

Sanctus@anarchist.nexus · 18 pts · 278d

Infinite Corruption in Infinite Combinations

SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 277d

Nothing will meaningfully improve until the rich fear for their lives

frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io · 13 pts · 277d

Of course, and then any political money benefitting Democratic candidates will be declared antifa terrorism

etherphon@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 277d

There was a limit? The spending is already ridiculously out of control. I don't want to see any more fucking ads.

owenfromcanada@lemmy.ca · 8 pts · 277d

I agree. Let's get rid of limits on party spending. Instead, let's ban it altogether.

FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 277d (1 reply)

OH NOH!

why is it everything I hear about the Supreme clownshow fills me with dread

hateisreality@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 276d

Because they aren't interested in serving the country they're only interested in serving the interests of a few complete assholes with money in this country

gmtom@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 277d

Let me guess. They're using the bribes donations are a form of free speech argument?

ameancow@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 277d
[ removed ]
santa@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 277d (1 reply)

What’s precedent anyhow? It’s for suckers and losers! Dats what orange grandpappy tole me /s

Zexks@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 277d

That really is the crux of it though isnt it. Soon as i saw that last line about "they need to follow the law". Its not law its something some people agreed on but was never codified. This has been a major weakness of our government since inception. Its just that in the past people respected traditions and precidemt and things like that. But it was never a 'requirement'. We rely on precident FAR to much. Our lawmakers have abdicated their responsibility to the courts and the executive branch. And now were going to reap what they sowed. This is exactly what authoritarians are always talking about. We have to find a way to force lawmakers to do their jobs and make it punishable to be so obstinate as to to disagree with everything out of spite.

resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 277d

Limits?

just_another_person@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 277d

How convenient

lunelovegood@ttrpg.network · -6 pts · 277d (1 reply)

Honestly, just speedrun this shit at this point.

All Americans deserve to suffer for sucking off corporations.

ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 277d

Says the 8-hour old account, lol.