Supreme Court Ruling on Aggregate Campaign Funding

  • Aired:  04/03/14
  •  | Views: 11,933

The Supreme Court lifts a ban on unlimited campaign contributions, citing the premise that money is a form of speech. (2:53)

NOW, NATION, EVERYBODY KNOWS I'MA HUGE FAN OF THE FIVE

CONSERVATIVE JUSTICES ON THESUPREME COURT.

THEY'RE LIKE A JUDICIAL VERSIONOF ONE DIRECTION IN THAT ALL

THEIR RULINGS GO IN ONEDIRECTION.

( LAUGHTER )BUT TWO YEARS AGO, I WAS

BETRAYED BY THE CUTE ONE, CHIEFJUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS BECAUSE IN

AN ACT OF JUDAS-PRUDENCE, HEVOTED TO UPHOLD OBAMACARE, AND

THAT BROKE MY HEART.

AND EVEN WORSE, UNDER OBAMACARE,I AM COVERED FOR CARDIAC

BREAKAGE.

( LAUGHTER )FOLKS, I'VE GOT SOME GOOD NEWS.

MY BOYFRIEND'S BACK.

>> BREAKING NEWS ON THE SUPREMECOURT, CHANGING THE RULES AGAIN

WHEN IT COMES TO CAMPAIGNCONTRIBUTIONS.

>> YOU CAN NOW GIVE TO AS MANYCANDIDATES AS YOU WANT.

THERE IS NO LIMIT ON HOW MUCHTOTAL MONEY ANY INDIVIDUAL

PERSON CAN SPEND.

THE COURT'S MAJORITY OPINION,WRITTEN BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE

JOHN ROBERTS SAID MONEY ISSPEECH AND THAT YOU CAN'T LIMIT

HOW MUCH AN INDIVIDUAL PERSONCAN SPEND.

HE SAID IF THE FIRST AMENDMENTCAN ABIDE BY FLAG BURNING, NAZI

PARADES, AND PROTESTS ATMILITARY FUNERALS IT CAN ABIDE

BY PEOPLE SPENDING AS MUCH MONEYAS THEY WANT TO SUPPORT THE

CANDIDATES OF THEIR CHOICES.

>> Stephen: WELL SAID--UNLIMITED CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS

ARE JUST AS GOOD AS NAZIS.

( LAUGHTER )NOW, THE CASE IN QUESTION IS

"McCUTCHEON V. F.E.C.," AND INA 5-4 DECISION, THE COURTS

ELIMINATED THE $123,200 CAP ONTHE TOTAL AMOUNT YOU CAN DONATE,

WHICH IS GREAT FOR ALL OF US, IFBY "US" YOU MEAN THE 591 PEOPLE

WHO GAVE THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLEDONATION IN 2012.

AND IF YOU'RE NOT ONE OF US, YOUREALLY SHOULD BE.

( LAUGHTER )WE HAVE GREAT PARTIES, TWO OF

THEM.

FOLKS, THIS IS ALL ABOUT THEFREEDOM OF SPEECH.

AGGREGATE CAPS UNFAIRLY LIMITHOW LOUD MY CASH COULD TALK

INSPECTOR THE ANTIQUATEDASSUMPTION GIVING POLITICIANS

GREASY PAPER BAGS FULL OF MONEYIS SOMEHOW A CORRUPTING

INFLUENCE.

BUT JUSTICE ROBERTS TEACHES USGOVERNMENT REGULATION MAY NOT

TARGET THE GENERAL GRATITUDE ACANDIDATE MAY FEEL TOWARDS THOSE

WHO SUPPORT HIM OR THE POLITICALACCESS SUCH SUPPORT MAY AFFORD.

INGRATIATION AND ACCESS ARE NOTCORRUPTION.

IN FACT, THOSE THINGS DON'T EVENHAVE THE APPEARANCE OF

CORRUPTION.

DID YOU GET THAT?

INGRATIATION AND ACCESS ARE NOTCORRUPTION.

SO IF YOU THINK LEGISLATORSLINING UP TO LISTEN TO

MEGADONORS LIKE THE KOCHBROTHERS OR GEORGE SOROS APPEARS

CORRUPT, GOOD NEWS-- JOHNROBERTS HAS RULED YOU DON'T

THINK THAT.

( LAUGHTER )NOW, ROBERTS KNOWS THERE'S ONLY

ONE REAL TYPE OF CORRUPTION--QUID PRO QUO.

OR THE DIRECT EXCHANGE OF ANOFFICIAL ACT FOR MONEY, AND

THAT IS EASY TO PROVE, ASLONG AS POLITICS REMEMBER TO

HOLD ON TO THEIR ITEMIZEDCORRUPTION RECEIPTS.

Loading...