As a Canadian, I was entirely ignorant of the Supreme Court’s role in this travesty of a Law. Appreciate the explainer.
Comment on Citizens United was never about helping people
chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 hours agoOne problem is that it’s a supreme court decision, and the only way to “repeal” those is a constitutional amendment, which requires support of a 2/3 majority of congress, or a new set of supreme court justices to make a new decision, but those are lifetime appointments and so you may have to wait decades for an opportunity. Realistically the only options are workarounds because a literal repeal has a very high barrier that’s unlikely to be overcome even with a very successful mass popular movement.
kat_angstrom@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 hours ago
np, also technically it is not a law, it’s a court interpretation about what laws the constitution allows en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 5 hours ago
Congress made a law greatly limiting what corporations and organizations could do with regards to publishing electioneering material. Citizens United wanted to publish electioneering material. Federal Election Commission said no. Citizens United sued. Case was appealed to the Supreme Court. SCOTUS said the law violated the first amendment rights of corporations, and overturned it.
boonhet@sopuli.xyz 8 hours ago
Supreme court’s decisions are not technically laws, but they’re treated as such as far as I can understand - they set precedent on how some law is to be interpreted and other courts follow it
Roe v Wade was another famous supreme court case that was essentially law, until the court was deemed republican enough to kick an abortion related case at them so they could undo it. Roe v Wade was what protected Americans’ right to get abortions.
adarza@lemmy.ca 8 hours ago
it just needs at least some turnover at scotus and a new case, so it can get a new ruling that really narrows the previous one or shreds it completely.