Case Study: My Experience With


Legal / Monday, September 23rd, 2019

What the Ban on Campaign Finance Is about

It is imperative to mention that the courts have chosen to stick to the ban imposed on contribution of unlimited funds to political campaigns. You will realize that around 90% of Americans prefer having the role of money in politics to be put under control. It is for this reason that a good number of people have been patiently waiting for this ruling to see if corporates will be given the room to donate in future. It is evident that not all will appreciate the decision that the Supreme Court has chosen to go for. They refused to lift the ban on this political campaign finance law. You will get to understand more about this particular ruling as you keep on reading.

You need to keep in mind that there was basically nothing strange that happened in the court today. The Supreme Court just chose to go by what the previous ruling on the campaign finance laws was without considering its challenges. As such, no corporate will be free to donate their money to campaigns or even candidates. It is through this decision that the role of corporates in the political arena is being tamed. In the previous ruling, you will learn that corporates were often allowed to contribute to the campaigns. Such would time and again come about if the money is not directly linked to a given individual. You will witness that this case was actually brought about by two companies that come from Massachusetts. this case was aimed at improving the sense of financial responsibilities as well as economic opportunities. It will actually be more prudent for you to consider a good lawyer in case of such a big case.

Seek to ensure that you are familiarized with the legal argument in this case. You will find that these companies argued that the first amendment rights of companies was barely being observed. The argument was based on the fact that political donations were components of freedom of speech. They also appealed to the constitution which indicates the need to equally protect each individual. It is evident that nonprofit as well as charity organizations are not allowed to finance any of these political campaigns. This means that they are treated differently from corporate entities. This is seen to be against the pillars of the constitution.

It is imperative to mention that what the high court ruled was still favored. This ruling was actually against corporates being allowed to contribute to political campaigns. This is due to the fact that they can spiral to corruption in politics. It is for this reason that no political candidate will be at liberty to receive any donation from corporations.

Suggested Post: check here