One of the most unpopular Supreme Court rulings in recent years, the Citizens United decision that defined corporate political spending as a form of free speech, may have a silver lining.
First Amendment Coalition, says they are, in fact, the difference between what is legal and allowable, and what comes into conflict with the First Amendment's protections of freedom of speech.The legal distinctions that apply to different kinds of campaign spending may seem arcane and confusing. But Peter Scheer, Executive Director of the
So far in the current election cycle, Scheer observes, the actions of the Super-PACS and the political operatives behind them, have blurred the differences between protected corporate campaign spending and private political donations that are subject to established regulations and reporting rules. He believes there is a clear way to distinguish between the two.
Scheer detailed his analysis of these and releated points in an article published recently in both Huffington Post and on the Coalition's website.