by MUMIA ABU-JAMAL
Few Supreme Court cases have evoked the sentiments unleashed by the Citizens United decision. Not since Bush v. Gore, have we seen so clearly that politics decides cases — not law.
The Citizens United case, which granted First Amendment rights to corporations, did far more than simply decide that corporations have free speech rights (a right, incidentally, that they’ve exercised in billions of ads and commercials for nearly a century). Citizens United abolished all limits that corporations may spend to support the candidates of their choosing.
What makes it a certainty that politics played the primary role, and not law, is the simple truth that the ‘precedent’ cited by the court as the basis for its decision isn’t precedent at all.
The Supreme Court traces its ideas that corporations are persons back to an 1886 case, Santa Clara City, v Southern Pacific Railroad. There’s only one problem with that precedent.
It doesn’t say what the court claims it says.
Don’t take my word for it. Read Santa Clara City v Southern Pac. R. Co., [6S. ct.1132] (1886). In it, you’ll find no discussion about a corporation having the rights of people, and certainly no legal holding to that effect.
The reason is simple. It’s not there.
ZNet for more