Impact of the First Obama State of the Union

[TinCow]

Stevens wrote that a century of history was rejected, while Obama said a century of law.

Last I checked, acts of Congress and SCOTUS decisions both qualified as law.

[Crazed Rabbit]

My point was that saying a century of history is more vague than a century of law. And the law overturned was from 2002, IIRC the older laws are still in effect.

CR

[TinCow]

My point was that saying a century of history is more vague than a century of law. And the law overturned was from 2002, IIRC the older laws are still in effect.

It would be more appropriate to say the older laws are now in limbo. While Citizens United specifically applies to 2 USC §441b, it makes several broad statements about the rights of corporations. Things like this:

this Court now concludes that independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption. That speakers may have influence over or access to elected officials does not mean that those officials are corrupt. And the appearance of influence or access will not cause the electorate to lose faith in this democracy.

The above statement essentially concludes that the specific reasons cited for campaign finance reform are illegitimate. This precedent casts doubt on all other laws that similarly restrict corporate campaign advocacy. Many laws which were previously accepted by corporations will now be challenged on the basis of the holdings made in Citizens United, and unless the composition of the Court changes before those cases are heard, they will likely be overturned as well.

I'm not saying that's necessarily a bad thing, but it's the reality of the way our judicial system works. When the Court changes its mind on an issue, it generally has to then re-evaluate everything else related to that issue. It will take a long time to see how this thing finally shakes out, but I think it's little more than punditry to say Obama "lied." That's a very strongly-charged word, and under the circumstances it strikes me as an attempt to score cheap political points rather than an accurate description of the situation.

[Vladimir]

My point was that saying a century of history is more vague than a century of law. And the law overturned was from 2002, IIRC the older laws are still in effect.

CR

This. This is also why I don't like the guy. He's too smart to be this ignorant which indicates it was intentional.

[Lemur]

This is pretty funny—Rudy Giuliani versus objective reality.

[CrossLOPER]

This is pretty funny—Rudy Giuliani versus objective reality.

I guess he was hoping that no one bothered watching.