• @FaeDrifter@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        288 months ago

        CU vs FEC was specifically about campaign financing, but yeah basically ruled that organizations like corporations are protected by 1A, and money counts as free speech.

        Which is obviously bullshit on every level, but just one way that a SCOTUS with a few corrupt individuals can destroy democracy for an entire country.

        • @Ulvain@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          28 months ago

          And that was under an overall-not-that-horrible president and with a somewhat-reasonably-not-corrupt supreme court, the next years will be a-ok I’m sure

        • @nybble41@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          08 months ago

          They ruled that people acting together have all the same rights that they would have acting individually, and that preventing someone from spending money on producing and promoting their speech effectively prevents them from being heard. Which are both perfectly true, common-sense statements.

          • @FaeDrifter@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            38 months ago

            They ruled that people acting together have all the same rights that they would have acting individually

            Bullshit, corporations are not “people acting together”, they’re autocratic command structures where one or few people hold all the power.

            preventing someone from spending money on producing and promoting their speech effectively prevents them from being heard

            Also total bullshit, unless you agree that allowing people to be poor is a violation of the first amendment, because being poor effectively prevents them from being heard. Which you won’t.

            Which are both perfectly true, common-sense statements

            I’m already confident you don’t have a single ounce of common sense in your empty head after reading those two sentences.

          • @FaeDrifter@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            18 months ago

            They ruled that people acting together have all the same rights that they would have acting individually

            Bullshit, corporations are not “people acting together”, they’re autocratic command structures where one or few people hold all the power.

            preventing someone from spending money on producing and promoting their speech effectively prevents them from being heard

            Also total bullshit, unless you agree that allowing people to be poor is a violation of the first amendment, because being poor effectively prevents them from being heard. Which you won’t.

            Which are both perfectly true, common-sense statements

            I’m already confident you don’t have a single ounce of common sense in your empty head after reading those two sentences.

    • Possibly linux
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -68 months ago

      I disagree. If you think USA today or any other news outlet shouldn’t have free speech then why bother with free speech to begin with.

      • @ursakhiin@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        98 months ago

        I don’t think USA today or any other outlet should be protected. I do think the reporters that work there should be protected.

        Corporations should be held accountable for what they say or “strongly encourage” others to say. Individuals should be protected if they get things wrong, though.