Please read the article below for more explanation of Justice Scalia’s statement.
Scalia would lead us to believe that the massive influx of corporate dollars allowed into the system by the Supreme Court Decision, Citizens United, will simply be neutralized by people turning off the television.
I had to take a minute to absorb the full implications of his statement, in fact, at first, I thought I had misread the article but after re-reading it, it still said the same thing.
Let me explore this, I can probably come up with a few hundred dollars to give in a campaign cycle. However, a corporation can give hundreds of millions of dollars or even billions of dollars. But it will all be “even steven” if people turn off the television sets?
Won’t the hundreds of millions of dollars also buy billboards, internet pop-ups, endless stacks of mailings and radio ads?
And since televisions watching is believed to be addicting with millions of Americans watching on average 4-6 hours a night, how likely is it that millions of them will turn off the set and go to bed? – or read a book? – or take up ceramics?
The Supreme Court Justice who helped turn the United States into one of the most oligarchic nations in the world with one decision, is trying to tell me that my concerns are trivial and there is really nothing to worry about.
No, the decision seriously damaged the prospect of a government for the people by the people. His sad attempt at trivialization is not surprising. His contempt for democracy was demonstrated by the decision making George Bush, the President of the United States.
I do not believe representative government is in anyway important to him.
That his decision making descends to such pitiful generalizations is not a sign of a Supreme Court that deserves our respect. It is a sign of a Supreme Court that no longer relies on any thing but class interest to make its decisions. It’s time for something new.
Image via Wikipedia
U.S. Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia has a simple solution for people who don’t like all the political advertisements unleashed by the court’s decision two years ago that ended limits on corporate contributions in political campaigns – change the channel or turn off the TV.
Scalia was asked about the decision during a presentation before the South Carolina Bar on Saturday, exactly two years after the court handed down the 5-4 decision in the case that led to the rise of Super PACs. They are outside groups affiliated with candidates that can take in unlimited contributions as long as they don’t directly coordinate with the candidate.
“I don’t care who is doing the speech – the more the merrier,” Scalia said. “People are not stupid. If they don’t like it, they’ll shut it off.”
- Elections Matter: Judicial Appointments (markamerica.com)
- Free speech for prudes and plutocrats (economist.com)
- We Need to Talk About Citizens United… (uchicagolawreview.wordpress.com)
- Would Antonin Scalia convict Jack Bauer? (oup.com)
- Justice According To Scalia and Thomas: Two Justices Dissent From Giving Death Row Inmate Appeals After He Was Abandoned By Counsel (jonathanturley.org)
- Justice Scalia’s Inferno (thetrialwarrior.com)
- Rick Santorum Picked The Ethical Trainwreck Who Thinks Child Labor Laws Are Unconstitutional As His Favorite Justice (thinkprogress.org)
- How The Republicans On The FEC Are Making Citizens United Even Worse (elmsprogressivemedia.wordpress.com)