Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Citizens United v. ... In a dissenting opinion, ... the vote was 5–4 in favor of Citizens United being allowed to show the film.
His dissent was joined by justices David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer; the majority opinion was written by Justice Antonin Scalia. Stevens stated that the Court's judgment was "a strained and unpersuasive reading" which overturned longstanding precedent , and that the Court had "bestowed a dramatic upheaval in the law."
There’s plenty of reason to question the Missouri senator whose big business donations dried up after he tried to reinstall Donald Trump on Jan. 6, 2021. | Opinion
With its ruling the Supreme Court upheld its Citizens United landmark decision. [19] While the Citizens United decision initially appeared to apply equally to state contests, [20] the Supreme Court ruled in American Tradition Partnership, Inc. v. Bullock that the Citizens United holding does so by applying it to Montana state law. [4]
Plus: Donald Trump responds to prosecutors on the presidential immunity question and the House GOP isn’t finished with Hunter Biden.
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission , 558 U.S. 310 (2010), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution .
Citizens United is a conservative 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization in the United States founded in 1988. In 2010, the organization won a U.S. Supreme Court case known as Citizens United v. FEC , which struck down as unconstitutional a federal law prohibiting corporations and unions from making expenditures in connection with federal elections.
But it was the ballot signature verification measure's majority opinion — which stated there is no right to vote enshrined in the Kansas Constitution's Bill of Rights — that drew fiery dissent ...