Constitution Check: Would the Supreme Court uphold a ban on Super PACs closely linked to candidates?
One word has always turned up in a string of modern constitutional rulings by the Supreme Court loosening federal controls on campaign spending. That word is “independent.”
James Madison’s concept of the separation of powers of the national government has always been thought to be a stroke of genius because it guaranteed a good deal of independence of the three major branches so that they could check each other, to prevent tyranny.
What is a Super PAC, and what connection, if any, does such an organization have to the Citizens United decision?
As tens of millions of dollars of money (much of it probably from corporations) flows often secretly into this year’s presidential and congressional campaigns–and as efforts to stop that flow seem frustrated–the U.S. Supreme Court has just signaled that it may take another look at its part in that situation.
If you do not like the rash of intensely negative campaign commercials on television this year, the ones made possible by the court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United, then turn off the television.