Campaign Finance: Lawyers’ Citizens United v. FEC U.S. Supreme Court Arguments (2009)


Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice: Argument this morning in case 08205, Citizens United versus the Federal Election Commission. Mr. Olson.
00:00:07
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
Mr. Chief Justice and may it please the court. Robust debate about candidates for elected office is the most fundamental value protected by the first amendment’s guarantee of free speech. YET THAT IS PRECISELY THE DIALOGUE THAT THE GOVERNMENT HAS PROHIBITED IF PRACTICED BY
00:00:16
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
UNIONS OR CORPORATIONS, ANY UNION OR ANY CORPORATION. THE GOVERNMENT CLAIMS IT MAY DO SO BASED UPON THE AUSTIN DECISION THAT CORPORATE SPEECH IS…
00:01:45
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
THAT CONGRESS COULD DRAW BETWEEN CORPORATIONS AND NATURAL HUMAN BEINGS FOR PURPOSES OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE?>>WHAT THE COURT HAS SAID IN THE FIRST AMENDMENT…
00:02:14
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
WHERE MANY OF THE INVESTORS MAY BE FOREIGN INDIVIDUALS OR ENTITIES?>>THE COURT IN THE PAST HAS MADE NO DISTINCTION BASED UPON THE NATURE OF THE ENTITY…
00:02:31
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
PARDON?>>NOWADAYS, THERE ARE FOREIGN INTERESTS, EVEN FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS, THAT OWN NOT ONE SHARE
00:02:41
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
BUT A GOODLY NUMBER OF SHARES.>>I SUBMIT THAT THE COURT’S DECISIONS IN CONNECTION WITH THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND CORPORATIONS HAVE IN THE
00:02:49
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
PAST MADE NO SUCH DISTINCTION.>>COULD
00:02:51
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
THEY, IN YOUR VIEW, IN THE VIEW THAT YOU’RE PUTTING
00:02:54
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
FORTH, THAT THERE IS NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN AN INDIVIDUAL AND CORPORATION FOR FIRST AMENDMENT PURPOSES IN ANY MEGACORPORATION,
00:03:04
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
EVEN IF MOST OF THE INVESTORS ARE FROM ABROAD, CONGRESS COULD NOT LIMIT THEIR SPENDING?>>I’M NOT
00:03:11
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
SAYING THAT, JUSTICE GINSBURG. I’M SAYING THAT THE FIRST AMENDMENT APPLIES. THEN THE NEXT STEP IS TO DETERMINE WHETHER CONGRESS AND THE GOVERNMENT HAS…
00:03:31
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
AWARE — CERTAINLY THE GOVERNMENT HAS NOT ADVANCED IT IN ITS BRIEF THAT IS SOME COMPELLING GOVERNMENT INTEREST BECAUSE OF FOREIGN INVESTMENT IN CORPORATIONS….
00:04:14
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
RELATED.>>THE FUNDAMENTAL POINT HERE IS — AND LET ME START WITH THIS. AND I THINK WE SHOULD START WITH THIS. AND THE GOVERNMENT HARDLY MENTIONS
00:04:23
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
THIS. THE LANGUAGE –>>MR.
00:04:26
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
OLSON, WOULD
00:04:28
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
YOU ANSWER JUSTICE GINSBURG’S QUESTION, YES
00:04:32
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
OR NO? LEGALLY FOREIGN INVESTORS,
00:04:36
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
DOES THE FIRST AMENDMENT PERMIT ANY DISTINCTION BETWEEN CORPORATE SPEAKERS AND INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS?>>I HAVE NOT — I’M NOT AWARE OF A CASE THAT…
00:04:48
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
BASED UPON THE DECISIONS OF THIS COURT, AND MY VIEW WOULD BE THAT UNLESS THERE’S A COMPELLING GOVERNMENTAL INTEREST AND A NARROWLY –>>IF THERE IS…
00:05:01
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
YOUR JUDGMENT?>>I WOULD NOT RULE THAT OUT, JUSTICE STEVENS. I MEAN, I CAN’T
00:05:05
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
IMAGINE ALL OF THE INFINITE VARIETIES OF POTENTIAL PROBLEMS
00:05:08
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
THAT MIGHT EXIST. BUT WE WOULD EVENTUALLY COME BACK TO THE NARROW TAILORING PROBLEM ANYWAY. WHAT THE
00:05:15
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
GOVERNMENT HAS DONE HERE IS PROHIBIT SPEECH — I DON’T KNOW HOW MANY UNIONS THERE ARE IN THIS
00:05:22
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
COUNTRY, BUT THERE ARE SOMETHING LIKE 6 MILLION CORPORATIONS THAT FILED TAX RETURNS IN 2006.>>MR. OLSON, DO YOU THINK THAT MEDIA CORPORATIONS THAT ARE…
00:05:47
Alito, Samuel A. Jr. – Associate Justice
FIRST AMENDMENT. CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW. NOW, WHAT THIS COURT HAS REPEATEDLY SAID IS THAT THERE MAY BE LAWS INHIBITING SPEECH IF THERE’S A COMPELLING…
00:05:59
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
NARROWLY TAILORED REMEDY. BUT THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS. I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT 97% OF THE 6 MILLION CORPORATIONS THAT FILED TAX RETURNS…
00:06:50
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
AND THAT WAY WE ISSUE THAT THE PEOPLE WHO CONTRIBUTE REALLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE ISSUE OF THE CANDIDATE, BUT SO THE CORPORATION CAN GIVE, BUT IT HAS…
00:07:28
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
WHAT YOU WANT TO SAY AND GET THEM TO CONTRIBUTE MONEY THROUGH A PROCESS THAT THIS JUSTICES –>>WHO IS THE “YOU”? THOSE ARE THE DIRECTORS? THE CEO?…
00:07:53
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
THE PROHIBITION WOULD EXIST WHETHER OR NOT THE SHAREHOLDERS AGREED. BUT LET ME GO BACK TO YOUR QUESTION.>>IT COVERS TOTALLY — TOTALLY OWNED CORPORATIONS,…
00:08:04
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
YES.>>ALL THE STOCK IN THE CORPORATION STILL CAN’T –>>YES, AND IT INCLUDES MEMBERSHIP CORPORATIONS SUCH AS CITIZENS UNITED.>>THE INDIVIDUAL…
00:08:21
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
OR 200 MILLION PEOPLE IN THE UNITED STATES WHO IF THEY GAVE $2500
00:08:24
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
RATHER THAN $2400, NOBODY COULD
00:08:26
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
SAY THAT THAT WAS REALLY AN EFFORT
00:08:28
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
TO BUY THE SENATOR OR THE CONGRESSMAN. SO IS THAT UNCONSTITUTIONAL,
00:08:32
Breyer, Stephen G. – Associate Justice
TOO?>>NO — WELL, WHAT THIS COURT HAS SAID IS THAT IN CONNECTION WITH CONTRIBUTION LIMITATIONS, THERE IS A POTENTIAL COMPELLING GOVERNMENTAL INTEREST….
00:08:53
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
PRO QUO CORRUPTION OR THE APPEARANCE OF QUID PRO QUO CORRUPTION, AND YOU KNOW JUSTICE BREYER WHAT THE COURT SAID IN THAT CASE IS BECAUSE IT’S NOT INHIBITING…
00:09:04
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
IT’S –>>SO HERE THE
00:09:06
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
OBVIOUS ARGUMENT IS LOOK, THEY SAID THE COMPELLING INTEREST IS THAT PEOPLE THINK THAT REPRESENTATIVES ARE BEING BOUGHT. OKAY? THAT’S TO PUT IT IN A…
00:09:26
Breyer, Stephen G. – Associate Justice
TO LIMIT THE EXPENDITURES THAT CORPORATIONS CAN MAKE ON ELECTIONARY COMMUNICATION IN THE LAST 30 DAYS OF A PRIMARY OVER THE AIR, TELEVISION, BUT NOT ON…
00:10:10
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
AN ELECTION. AND THE COURT USED THE WORDS “INDISPENSABLE.” AND WHAT THE COURT SAID IN BUCKLEY VERSUS VALLEJO IS IT COMPARED A LIMITATION ON EXPENDITURES…
00:11:06
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
WILL YOU PLEASE GIVE ME MONEY? THEY SAID WE CAN’T DO THAT. THE OTHER IS IN WHICH A CORPORATION TAKES OUT AN AD FOR THE — FOR THE CANDIDATE WHICH RELIEVES…
00:11:48
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
WHAT IF CONGRESS THOUGHT THE PEOPLE MIGHT THINK THAT THAT
00:11:51
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
WAS KIND OF SOMEHOW
00:11:53
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
SUSPECT? THAT IS NOT A BASIS FOR PROHIBITING
00:11:57
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
SPEECH BY A WHOLE CLASS OF –>>WELL, OF COURSE, IT DID, WAS A BASIS FOR PROHIBITING SPEECH BY IN THE SENSE OF GIVING CONTRIBUTIONS ABOVE $2,400,…
00:12:21
Breyer, Stephen G. – Associate Justice
IN THIS CASE ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OF A COMPELLING INTEREST? BECAUSE CONGRESS SEEMED TO THINK THAT THERE WAS CERTAINLY THAT. IT’S THIS CONCERN ABOUT THE…
00:13:09
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
ABOUT THE SO-CALLED DISTORTION RATIONALE IN AUSTIN. THE DISTORTION RATIONALE WHICH THEY SEEM TO HAVE ABANDONED
00:13:16
Breyer, Stephen G. – Associate Justice
IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFS FILED IN CONNECTION WITH THIS ARGUMENT, AND THEY
00:13:20
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
RESORTED TO THE CORRUPTION APPEARANCE OF CORRUPTION. THERE ISN’T A SUFFICIENT RECORD OF THIS.>>WHAT ABOUT THE DISTRICT COURT’S FINDING? WASN’T…
00:13:47
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
OR THE DEFEAT OF THEIR OPPONENT? THERE WAS A FINDING OF FACT TO THAT EFFECT, WAS THERE NOT?>>THE — YES. THERE IS SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT IN THE DISTRICT…
00:14:15
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
CORPORATION.>>NOT 97% OF THE CONTRIBUTIONS. I MEAN, THE CONTRIBUTIONS THAT COUNT ARE THE ONES FROM THE CORPORATIONS THAT CAN AMASS THESE HUGE SUMS IN…
00:14:28
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
TREASURIES.>>I THINK THAT GOES BACK TO JUSTICE KENNEDY’S QUESTION, AND MY RESPONSE
00:14:33
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
WHICH DISTINGUISHES BETWEEN CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES, THE POINT
00:14:37
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
THAT JUSTICE KENNEDY WAS MAKING IN HIS QUESTION IS THAT UNDER SOME CIRCUMSTANCES AN EXPENDITURE MIGHT COINCIDE OR RESONATE WITH WHAT THE CANDIDATE…
00:14:49
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
VERY CAREFULLY IN BUCKLEY VERSUS VALLEJO AND SAID THAT MIGHT NOT BE THE CASE. IT MIGHT, IN FACT, BE THESE EXPENDITURES MIGHT BE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE…
00:15:40
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
AND AUSTIN DID ADDRESS — YOU’RE CORRECT — EXPENDITURES. BUT IT BASED IT ON A RATIONALE.>>MORE THAN SAID WE’RE NOT DECIDING, IT SAID THEY’RE ENTIRELY…
00:15:57
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
FOOTNOTE 14 IN THE BELLOTTI CASE THAT CITED CASE AFTER CASE AFTER CASE THAT SAID CORPORATIONS HAD RIGHTS OR PROTECTED RIGHTS UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT….
00:16:07
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
NOT DISAGREEING WITH WHAT YOU SAID, JUSTICE STEVENS. THE COURT SAID IT WAS DICTA BECAUSE THE COURT DID NOT DEAL
00:16:15
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
WITH IT.>>IT’S BEEN REPEATED. THAT FOOTNOTE HAS BEEN REPEATEDLY CITED IN SUBSEQUENT CASES, MOST OF WHICH WERE UNANIMOUS.>>WELL, BECAUSE — AND I…
00:16:36
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
YOU’VE JUST SAID, JUSTICE STEVENS.>>IT SAID WE’RE NOT DECIDING.>>THAT’S THE POINT I’M TRYING TO MAKE.>>I DON’T MIND CITING THAT. BELLOTTI DIDN’T…
00:16:47
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
WHAT BELLOTTI ALSO SAID, AND I THINK THIS IS ALSO IN MANY DECISIONS
00:16:51
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
OF THIS COURT, THE INHERENT WORTH OF SPEECH IN TERMS OF ITS CAPACITY
00:16:55
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
FOR INFORMING THE PUBLIC DOES NOT DEPEND UPON THE IDENTITY OF THE SOURCE WHETHER CORPORATION,
00:17:01
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
ASSOCIATION, UNION
00:17:02
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
OR INDIVIDUAL.>>NOW THAT WE’VE CLEARED UP
00:17:05
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
THAT BELLOTTI DIDN’T DECIDE THE QUESTION, WHAT
00:17:08
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
IS THE DISTINCTION THAT — WHY DON’T YOU THINK THAT DISTINCTION MAKES SENSE? IN OTHER WORDS, YOU DON’T HAVE THE POTENTIAL FOR CORRUPTION IF A CORPORATION…
00:17:24
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
SAID IN THE PAST IS THAT YOU DO HAVE THAT PROBLEM OF CORRUPTION. IN OTHER WORDS, WHY ISN’T THAT DISTINCTION A WAY TO RECONCILE BELLOTTI AND AUSTIN?…
00:17:53
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
WHERE DID WE SAY THAT?>>YOU SAID THAT REPEATEDLY INCLUDING MOST RECENTLY IN THE WISCONSIN RIGHT-TO-LIFE CASE. AND IT FIRST APPEARED IN BUCKLEY ITSELF….
00:18:13
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
CANDIDATES. THE CORPORATION
00:18:15
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
INTEREST AND THE INTEREST THAT ITS FIDUCIARY OFFICERS ARE PRESENTING HAD IT SPEAKS TO BEHALF OF THE CORPORATION.>>I DON’T THINK YOU’RE CORRECT TO…
00:18:44
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
WHICH OCCURRED REPEATEDLY IS THAT THE DISTINCTION DISSOLVES IMPRACTICAL APPLICATION. THAT, JUSTICE STEVENS, I THINK, ADDRESSES THE VERY COMMON-SENSE…
00:18:55
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
YOU’RE ADDRESSING AN ISSUE, WHETHER
00:18:57
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
YOU’RE ADDRESSING A REFERENDUM MATTER, WHETHER IT’S A PROPOSED LEGISLATION OR A CANDIDATE THAT IS GOING TO
00:19:03
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
RAISE TAXES ON THE CORPORATION, THOSE DISTINCTIONS DISSOLVE. IT’S ALL FIRST AMENDMENT FREEDOM.>>I THOUGHT THAT BUCKLEY HAD NARROWED THE STATUTE PRECISELY…
00:19:31
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
EXPRESSION.” THEN SECONDLY THE COURT AND THE WORDS OF THE STATUTE WERE “ANY PERSON WHICH INCLUDES CORPORATIONS” FOUND THE STATUTE AS NARROWED UNCONSTITUTIONAL
00:19:43
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
AND SAID –>>AND SOME
00:19:44
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
OF THE PLAINTIFFS WERE CORPORATIONS.>>SOME OF
00:19:46
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
THE PLAINTIFFS WERE CORPORATIONS. AND THE CASES –>>DISCUSSED IN THE OPINION, WAS IT?>>IT WASN’T DISCUSSED IN THE OPINION. WHAT WAS DISCUSSED IN…
00:20:04
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
REPEATEDLY CITES CASES
00:20:06
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
INVOLVING CORPORATIONS INCLUDING NAACP VERSUS ALABAMA AND “NEW
00:20:10
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
YORK
00:20:11
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
TIMES” VERSUS SULLIVAN. ALL CASES INVOLVING CORPORATIONS. SO WHILE IT WASN’T SPECIFICALLY DISCUSSED, IT WAS A PART OF THE DECISION OF THE COURT THAT…
00:21:07
Breyer, Stephen G. – Associate Justice
POLITICAL PARTIES COULDN’T BECAUSE POLITICAL PARTIES CAN ONLY SPEND HARD MONEY ON THIS KIND OF EXPENDITURE. AND THEREFORE THE GROUP THAT IS CHARGED…
00:21:57
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
HARD-MONEY CONTRIBUTIONS. BUT CORPORATIONS AND TRADE UNIONS CAN SPEND UNLIMITED FUNDS.>>WELL, IF THE COURT DECIDES IN FAVOR OF THE ARGUMENTS THAT…
00:22:08
Breyer, Stephen G. – Associate Justice
YOU’RE SUGGESTING IS THAT BECAUSE THERE ARE OTHER LIMITATIONS THAT SOMEONE HAS NOT CHALLENGED IN THIS CASE, THAT THAT WOULD BE SOMEHOW UNFAIR AND UNBALANCED….
00:22:25
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
DO ABOUT IT? AND THAT’S WHY I WANT YOU TO TAKE A POSITION ON ANOTHER IMPORTANT PART OF THAT STATUTE. AND THAT IS THE PART THAT SAYS POLITICAL PARTIES…
00:22:38
Breyer, Stephen G. – Associate Justice
EXCEPT OUT OF HARD MONEY.>>I WANT TO ADDRESS THAT IN THIS WAY. AND I SAID WHEN WE WERE HERE BEFORE THAT MOST FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT THAT WE CAN EXERCISE…
00:23:03
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
CONTROLS. LAST YEAR THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO GIVE ADVISORY OPINIONS DIDN’T EVEN HAVE A QUORUM FOR SIX MONTHS…
00:24:02
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
WHAT JUSTICE BREYER WAS ASKING ME.>>MR. OLSON, ARE YOU GIVING UP ON YOUR EARLIER ARGUMENTS THAT THERE ARE WAYS TO AVOID THE CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION…
00:24:19
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
TWO OF OUR COURT’S PRECEDENTS, BUT ARE YOU GIVING UP ON YOUR EARLIER ARGUMENTS THAT THERE ARE
00:24:25
Sotomayor, Sonia – Associate Justice
STATUTORY INTERPRETATIONS THAT WOULD AVOID THE CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION?>>NO, JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR. THERE ARE ALL KINDS OF LINES THAT THE COURT COULD DRAW…
00:24:50
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
SPECIFICALLY IN THE WASHINGTON RIGHT-TO-LIFE CASE IS THAT THE LINES, IF THEY ARE TO BE DRAWN, MUST NOT BE LINES THAT ARE AMBIGUOUS, THAT INVITE LITIGATION,…
00:25:28
Sotomayor, Sonia – Associate Justice
CORPORATIONS, ET CETERA. BUT THERE’S NO RECORD THAT I’M REVIEWING THAT ACTUALLY GOES INTO THE VERY QUESTION THAT YOU’RE ARGUING EXISTS, WHICH IS A…
00:26:08
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
HAD A LONG LEGISLATIVE RECORD AND PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY TO PRODUCE THAT RECORD. AND IT’S THEIR OBLIGATION TO DO SO.>>BUT THE CHALLENGE –>>MAY…
00:26:35
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM IS?>>I WILL,
00:26:37
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
JUSTICE. THANK YOU.>>WHY DON’T YOU TELL US NOW, WE’LL GIVE YOU TIME FOR REBUTTAL.>>DON’T KEEP US IN SUSPENSE.>>EVERY LINE INCLUDING THE LINES THAT…
00:26:57
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
YEAR FROM NOW
00:26:58
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
BECAUSE THE MOVIE MIGHT BE SHORTER. IT MIGHT BE VIDEO ON DEMAND. IT MIGHT BE A BROADCAST. IT MIGHT HAVE A DIFFERENT
00:27:05
Unidentified Speaker
TONE WITH RESPECT TO A
00:27:06
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
CANDIDATE. EVERY ONE OF THOSE LINES PUTS THE SPEAKER AT PERIL THAT HE WILL GO TO JAIL OR BE PROSECUTED, OR THERE WILL BE LITIGATION, ALL OF WHICH…
00:27:38
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
OFFER AND RESPOND TO THAT DURING THE REBUTTAL, MR. CHIEF JUSTICE.>>THANK YOU, MR.
00:27:55
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
OLSON.>>MR. ABRAMS?>>MR. CHIEF JUSTICE, AND MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT. THE FIRST CASE CITED TO YOU BY MR. OLSON HAPPENED IN “THE NEW YORK TIMES”…
00:28:21
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
IN THAT CASE THE COURT WAS
00:28:23
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
CONFRONTED WITH A SITUATION
00:28:24
Abrams, Floyd – Attorney
WHERE “THE TIMES” MADE THREE ARGUMENTS TO THE COURT. THEY SAID FOR US TO WIN, THEY SAID, YOU EITHER HAVE TO REVISE BASICALLY FEDERALIZE LIBEL LAW TO A…
00:29:51
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
LAW AT THAT POINT THAT SAID –>>THERE WAS NO RULING OF THIS COURT.>>THAT’S TRUE, YOUR HONOR.>>TO ADHERE TO OUR PRECEDENTS, ESPECIALLY A CASE…
00:30:04
Abrams, Floyd – Attorney
REPEATING THE BUSINESS ABOUT AMASSING LARGE FUNDS IN CORPORATE TREASURIES. IT WAS NOT A NEW IDEA IN AUSTIN. AND IT
00:30:15
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
WAS REPEATED
00:30:16
Abrams, Floyd – Attorney
AFTER
00:30:19
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
AUSTIN. BUT THERE WAS — “TIMES” AGAINST SULLIVAN, I THINK, IS QUITE DISTINCT. THE QUESTION THAT WAS POSED HERE IS, IS IT A PROPER WAY TO RESOLVE…
00:30:56
Abrams, Floyd – Attorney
THE COURT TO SAY RATHER THAN TAKING A NARROWER ROUTE TO THE SAME RESULT, IT IS WORTH OUR MOVING AWAY IN THIS CASE FROM LOOKING FOR THE NARROWEST WAY…
00:31:38
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
THE ISSUE OF STARE DECISIS, AND YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WASN’T INVOLVED, BUT THE FIRST QUESTION OBVIOUSLY WAS.>>RIGHT.>>AND STARE DECISIS, OF COURSE,…
00:32:05
Abrams, Floyd – Attorney
LIKE. THE TIME IN THIS
00:32:08
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
CASE FOR THE McCONNELL CASE, OF COURSE, IS ONLY SIX YEARS. THE TIME FOR THE AUSTIN CASE IS 19 YEARS, WHICH IS LESS THAN ONE RULING OF THIS COURT’S JUST…
00:32:41
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
SPEECH WAS CORPORATE INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES WERE BARRED BY A RULING OF THIS COURT. THAT HAD NOT HAPPENED PRIOR TO AUSTIN. AND THE SOLICITOR GENERAL’S…
00:32:57
Abrams, Floyd – Attorney
LIMITS ON CORPORATE SPENDING IN AID OF POLITICAL CAMPAIGN SINCE THE TURN OF THE 20th CENTURY.>>THERE HAD BEEN LIMITS ON CORPORATE CONTRIBUTIONS SINCE…
00:33:18
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
YES, YOUR HONOR. 1947. PRESIDENT TRUMAN VETOED THAT BILL SAYING THAT IT WAS A DANGEROUS INTRUSION INTO FREE
00:33:27
Abrams, Floyd – Attorney
SPEECH. THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN AN AREA OF ENORMOUS CONTROVERSY, NOT JUST IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE BUT IN THE
00:33:37
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
JUDICIAL SPHERE. THE EARLY CASES IN WHICH ONCE WHAT THE COURT DID WAS
00:33:41
Abrams, Floyd – Attorney
TO BASICALLY SAY IN ONE CASE AFTER ANOTHER THAT THE STATUTE DID NOT GOVERN THE PARTICULAR FACTS OF THE CASE SO AS TO AVOID –>>THOSE WERE REUNION…
00:34:12
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
OF YEARS THROUGHOUT
00:34:14
Abrams, Floyd – Attorney
AMERICAN HISTORY IN WHICH IT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED THAT INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES COULD BE BARRED. IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN A MATTER OF HIGH LEVEL OF CONTROVERSY…
00:34:56
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
00:34:59
Abrams, Floyd – Attorney
YES. YES, YOUR HONOR.>>GOING
00:35:01
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
BACK TO THE QUESTION OF STARE DECISIS, THE ONE THING THAT’S INTERESTING ABOUT THIS
00:35:06
Abrams, Floyd – Attorney
AREA OF LAW FOR THE LAST 100 YEARS IS THE ACTIVE INVOLVEMENT
00:35:09
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
THAT BOTH STATE AND
00:35:10
Abrams, Floyd – Attorney
00:35:11
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
FEDERAL LEGISLATURES, IN TRYING TO FIND THAT BALANCE BETWEEN THE INTERESTS OF PROTECTING, IN THEIR VIEWS, HOW
00:35:19
Abrams, Floyd – Attorney
THE ELECTORAL PROCESS SHOULD BE PERCEIVED AND
00:35:22
Sotomayor, Sonia – Associate Justice
THE INTERESTS OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT. AND SO MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, ONCE WE SAY THEY CAN’T EXCEPT ON THE BASIS OF A COMPELLING GOVERNMENT INTEREST NARROWLY…
00:37:04
Abrams, Floyd – Attorney
WIN THIS CASE OTHER THAN A BROADWAY. IN MY VIEW, THE PRINCIPLES AT STAKE HERE ARE THE SAME. CITIZENS UNITED HAPPENS TO BE SORT OF A EXAMPLE OF THIS…
00:39:00
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
WAIT. WE NEVER QUESTIONED
00:39:01
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
IT, BUT WE NEVER APPROVED IT EITHER. AND WE GAVE SOME REALLY WEIRD INTERPRETATIONS TO THE TAFT-HARTLEY ACT IN ORDER TO AVOID CONFRONTING THE QUESTION….
00:39:20
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
LEFT STANDING THE LEGISLATION THAT IS AT ISSUE IN THIS CASE. FIRST THE CONTRIBUTION LIMITS, THEN THE EXPENDITURE LIMITS THAT CAME IN BY WAY OF TAFT-HARTLEY….
00:39:33
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
THOSE LIMITS.>>I DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU’RE SAYING. I MEAN, WE’RE NOT A SELF-STARTING INSTITUTION HERE. WE ONLY DISAPPROVE OF SOMETHING WHEN SOMEBODY…
00:39:54
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
A SELF-STARTING INSTITUTION, BUT MANY LITIGANTS BROUGHT MANY CASES TO YOU FROM 1907 ONWARDS. AND IN EACH CASE THIS COURT TURNS DOWN, DECLINED THE …
00:40:14
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
CONTRIBUTION EXPENDITURE LINE. AND YOU’RE CORRECT IF YOU LOOK AT CONTRIBUTIONS. BUT THIS IS AN EXPENDITURE CASE. AND I THINK THAT IT DOESN’T CLARIFY…
00:40:30
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
EXPENDITURE LIMITATIONS WHICH, IN ORDER TO WORK AT ALL, HAVE TO HAVE A SPEAKER-BASED DISTINCTION, EXEMPTION FROM MEDIA, CONTENT-BASED DISTINCTION, TIME-BASED…
00:41:03
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
WHAT IT PERCEIVES TO BE A LOOPHOLE. SO, IN FACT, FOR 100 YEARS, CORPORATIONS HAVE MADE NEITHER CONTRIBUTIONS NOR EXPENDITURES SAVE FOR A BRIEF PERIOD…
00:41:50
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
SO WE’LL JUST SKIP OVER THE SECOND. MY THIRD POINT IS THAT THIS IS AN ANOMALOUS CASE IN PART BECAUSE THIS IS AN ATYPICAL PLAINTIFF. AND THE REASON THIS…
00:42:07
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
SO YOU’RE GIVING UP
00:42:09
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
THE DISTINCTION FROM MCFL
00:42:11
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
THAT YOU DEFENDED IN YOUR OPENING BRIEF? THERE YOU SAID THIS DOESN’T QUALIFY AS A DIFFERENT KIND OF CORPORATION. BECAUSE IT TAKES CORPORATE FUNDS. AND…
00:42:29
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
FAITHFULLY. AND THAT’S WHAT THE FEC HAS TRIED TO DO.>>SO I GUESS DO YOU THINK MCFL APPLIES IN THIS CASE EVEN THOUGH THE CORPORATION TAKES CORPORATE…
00:42:40
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
FOR-PROFIT CORPORATIONS?>>I DON’T THINK MCFL, AS WRITTEN, APPLIES IN THIS CASE. BUT I THINK THAT THE COURT COULD, AS LOWER COURTS HAVE DONE, ADJUST…
00:42:54
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
THAT WOULD REQUIRE A REMANNED. WHAT LOWER COURTS HAVE DONE — MCFL WAS WRITTEN IN A VERY STRICT KIND OF WAY SO THAT THE ORGANIZATION HAD TO
00:43:02
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
HAVE A POLICY OF ACCEPTING NO CORPORATE FUNDS WHATSOEVER. SOME OF THE LOWER COURTS INCLUDING THE D.C. CIRCUIT WHICH, OF COURSE, SEES A LOT OF THESE…
00:43:35
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
WE’VE POSED ON REARGUMENT?>>NO, I DON’T THINK THAT THAT’S
00:43:38
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
FAIR. WE THINK — WE CONTINUE TO T TNK THAT THEHEUDGMENT BELOW SHOULD A
00:43:44
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
AFFIRD.D. IF YOU’R’RE ASKING ME MR. CHIEFEF STSTICE, AS TO W WHETHER THE GORNRNMENT HAS A PRERERENCE AS TO THE WAY IN WCHCHT LOSES, IF HAS TO LOSE, THE…
00:43:54
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
YES.>>WHATASASE OF OURS —
00:43:55
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
WHAT CASE OF OURS
00:43:57
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
SUGGESTS THAT THERE’S A HIERARCHY OF BASIS ON WHICH WE SHOULD RULE AGAINST A PARTWHWHEN BOTH OF THEM INVOLVE CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS? EXTENDING, MODIFYING…
00:44:15
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
AMENDMENT. SO WHAT CASE SAYS WE SHOULD PREFER ONE AS OPPOSED TO THE OTHER?>>I THINK THE QUESTION REALLY IS THE COURT’S STANDARD PRACTICE OF DECIDING…
00:44:38
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
YET ANOTHER IS THE QUESTION OF HOW IT APPLIES TO A 90-MINUTE INFOMERCIAL AS OPPOSED TO SMALLER ADVERTISEMENTS.>>BUT IF YOU INSIST ON THE AS-APPLIED…
00:45:09
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
OBJECT TO A PARTICULAR FORM OF CONDUCT CAN RAISE THAT IF THE STATUTE COVERS IT IN ORDER THAT THE STATUTE DOES NOT HAVE AN ONGOING CHILL AGAINST SPEECH?…
00:46:01
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
THEN CONFIRMED IN WRTL TO FIND THAT PICKRA WHICH IS THE ONLY STATUTE DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THIS CASE, DID NOT HAVE THAT SUBSTANTIAL OVERBREADTH.>>LET…
00:46:31
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
NONPROFIT CORPORATIONS DON’T FUNCTION AS CONDUITS FOR THE FOR-PROFIT CORPORATIONS.>>SUPPOSE WE WERE TO SAY THAT. WOULD THE STATUTE THEN NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY…
00:46:42
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
THINK THAT THE STATUTE IS SUBSTANTIALLY OVERBROAD RIGHT NOW. SO IF YOU TOOK OUT CERTAIN APPLICATIONS, I CAN’T –>>I’M ASKING YOU TO ASSUME THAT …
00:46:57
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
SEVER IT BASED ON THE LANGUAGE.>>I SEE WHAT YOU’RE SAYING. WELL, YOU COULD DO A COUPLE
00:47:02
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
THINGS. YOU COULD DO WHAT JUSTICE STEVENS SUGGESTED. SO JUSTICE STEVENS SUGGESTED — I SUGGESTED TO CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS –>>I DON’T THINK YOU REALLY…
00:47:10
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
I SUGGESTED BECAUSE YOU TREATED IT AS AN ENLARGEMENT OF THE MCFL.>>I WAS GOING TO GO BACK.>>THAT IS NOT WHAT THE NATIONAL RIFLE
00:47:20
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
ASSOCIATION ARGUES OR WHAT’S IN JEFFORDS. IT CORES ADS THAT ARE FINANCED EXCLUSIVELY BY INDIVIDUALS EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE SPONSORED BY A CORPORATION….
00:47:29
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
YES, THAT’S EXACTLY RIGHT. WHAT YOU’RE SUGGESTING, JUSTICE STEVENS, IS ESSENTIALLY STRIPPING THE WILLSTONE
00:47:37
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
AMENDMENT FROM
00:47:38
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
BIKRA.>>TREATING THE SNOW-JEFFORDS AMENDMENT AS BEING THE CORRECT TEST, AND NOBODY’S EXPLAINED WHY THAT WOULDN’T BE A PROPER SOLUTION NOT NEARLY AS…
00:47:49
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME REASONS THAT THAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE. THE WELLSTONE AMENDMENT WAS A FUNNY KIND OF THING THAT WAS PASSED VERY NARROWLY. BUT…
00:48:00
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
WAS PASSED WITH A PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL SUPPORT OF MANY PEOPLE WHO VOTED AGAINST THE LEGISLATION IN THE END PRESUMABLY AS A POISON PILL.>>
00:48:08
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
IF WE GO THAT ROUTE, WHAT WE’RE DOING IS CREATING AN ACCOUNTING INDUSTRY, AREN’T WE? CORPORATIONS GIVE HUGE AMOUNTS OF MONEY TO THE C-4 ORGANIZATION….
00:48:30
Breyer, Stephen G. – Associate Justice
WE DON’T WANT THAT. CONGRESS SAID THAT’S GOING TO BE A NIGHTMARE. AND WE DECIDE WELLSTONE. FOR WHATEVER REASONS. NOW, DON’T WE HAVE TO FOCUS ON WHETHER…
00:49:10
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
PACs, JUST SEPARATE BANK ACCOUNTS WHICH INCLUDE ONLY SEPARATE EXPENDITURES.>>WHY IS THAT NOT THE WISEST, NARROWEST SOLUTION PUT BEFORE US?>>IT IS…
00:49:24
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
THINK BETTER SOLUTION THAN A FACIAL INVALIDATION OF THE WHOLE STATUTE.>>WHAT DO YOU UNDERSTAND TO BE THE COMPELLING INTEREST THAT THE COURT AR DIG…
00:49:38
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
BRIEFS, WE’VE SUGGESTED THAT AUSTIN DID NOT ARTICULATE WHAT WE BELIEVED TO BE THE
00:49:43
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
STRONGEST COMPELLING INTEREST WHICH IS THE ANTICORRUPTION INTEREST. BUT WHAT THE COURT
00:49:48
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
ARTICULATED IN AUSTIN WAS ESSENTIALLY A CONCERN ABOUT CORPORATIONS USING THE CORPORATE FORUM TO
00:49:55
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
APPROPRIATE OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY FOR EXPRESS PURPOSES.>>RIGHT. BUT YOU’VE MORE OR LESS ABANDONED IS TOO STRONG A WORD, BUT AS YOU SAY, YOU’VE RELIED…
00:50:19
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
IT’S KIND OF UP FOR PLAY IN THE SENSE THAT YOU WOULD GROUND IT ON AN INTEREST THAT THE COURT HAS NEVER RECOGNIZED?>>WELL, A COUPLE OF POINTS. THE…
00:50:46
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
I WOULD SAY THAT IT’S A CONCERN ABOUT CORPORATE USE OF OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY TO ELECTION –>>PUTTING IT OUTSIDE, PUTTING THE
00:50:57
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
QUID PRO INTEREST ASIDE, WHERE DO YOU SUPPORT WHAT YOU ARTICULATE IN AUSTIN?>>WELL, WE TALK ABOUT SHAREHOLDER PROTECTION
00:51:04
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
AND WHERE WE TALK ABOUT THE DISTORTION OF THE ELECTORAL PROCESS THAT OCCURS WHEN CORPORATIONS USE THEIR SHAREHOLDERS’ MONEY WHO MAY OR MAY NOT –…
00:51:15
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
PROTECTION INTEREST AS OPPOSED TO THE FACT THAT CORPORATIONS HAVE SUCH WEALTH.>>I THINK THAT THEY’RE CONNECTED
00:51:22
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
BECAUSE BOTH COME –>>SO AM I RIGHT AND IN SAYING IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING YOU DO NOT RELY AT ALL ON THE MARKET DISTORTION RATIONALE ON WHICH…
00:51:32
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
NOT THE SHAREHOLDER RATIONALE, NOT THE QUID PRO QUO RATIONALE, THE MARKET DISTORTION THAT THESE CORPORATIONS HAVE A LOT OF MONEY.>>WE DID NOT RELY…
00:51:41
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
AUSTIN TO THE EXTENT THAT ANYBODY TAKES AUSTIN
00:51:43
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
TO BE SUGGESTING ANYTHING ABOUT THE EQUALIZATION OF A SPEECH MARKET. SO I KNOW THAT THAT’S THE WAY MANY PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THE DISTORTION RATIONALE…
00:52:00
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
AUSTIN, WE HAVE TO ACCEPT YOUR INVITATION THAT THE QUID PRO QUO INTEREST SUPPORTS THE HOLDING THERE OR THE SHAREHOLDER PROTECTION INTEREST.>>I WOULD…
00:52:19
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
TO THE SHAREHOLDER INTEREST THAT IS, IN TRUTH, MY VIEW OF AUSTIN WHICH IS A VIEW THAT WHEN CORPORATIONS USE OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY TO ELECTION YEAR. THAT…
00:52:31
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
THE SHAREHOLDERS THEMSELVES BUT A SORT OF BROADER HARM TO THE PUBLIC THAT COMES FROM DISTORTION OF THE ELECTION HEARING BY CORPORATIONS –>>LET’S…
00:53:00
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
SHOP, THE LOCAL NEW CAR DEALER? I DON’T KNOW ANY SMALL BUSINESS IN THIS COUNTRY THAT ISN’T INCORPORATED. AND THE VAST MAJORITY OF THEMHOLDER OWNED….
00:53:49
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
NOW ADDRESSING WHICH IS THOSE SHAREHOLDERS WHO DON’T AGREE WITH THIS POLITICAL POSITION ARE BEING SOMEHOW CHEATED. IT DOESN’T APPLY PROBABLY
00:53:58
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
TO THE VAST MAJORITY OF CORPORATIONS IN THIS COUNTRY.>>YOU’RE QUITE RIGHT, JUSTICE SCALIA. WHEN IT COMES TO SINGLE SHAREHOLDERS, THE KIND OF OTHER…
00:54:21
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
WHAT IS YOUR ANSWER TO THE ARGUMENT THAT MORE THAN HALF THE STATES INCLUDING CALIFORNIA AND OREGON, VIRGINIA, WASHINGTON STATE,
00:54:30
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
DELAWARE, MARYLAND, A GREAT MANY OTHERS PERMIT INDEPENDENT CORPORATE EXPENDITURES FOR JUST THESE PURPOSES?
00:54:37
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
NOW, HAVE THEY ALL BEEN OVERWHELMED BY CORRUPTION? A LOT OF MONEY IS SPENT ON ELECTIONS IN
00:54:41
Alito, Samuel A. Jr. – Associate Justice
CALIFORNIA. IS THERE A RECORD THAT THE CORPORATIONS HAVE CORRUPTED THE POLITICAL PROCESS THERE?>>I THINK THE EXPERIENCE OF SOME HALF THE STATES CANNOT…
00:55:08
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
AREA PRECISELY BECAUSE — AT LEAST I AM — I DOUBT THAT ONE CAN EXPECT A BODY OF INCUMBENTS TO DRAW
00:55:19
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
ELECTION RESTRICTIONS THAT DO NOT FAVOR INCUMBENTS. NOW, IS THAT EXCESSIVELY CYNICAL OF ME? I DON’T THINK SO.>>I THINK, JUSTICE SCALIA, IT’S WRONG….
00:55:48
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
CHALLENGERS. AND IN THE PRIOR ELECTION CYCLE, EVEN MORE THAN THAT. AND FOR AN OBVIOUS REASON. BECAUSE WHEN CORPORATIONS PLAY IN THE POLITICAL PROCESS,…
00:56:41
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
CONGRESS, CORPORATIONS HAVE LOTS OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT ENVIRONMENT, TRANSPORTATION ISSUES, AND YOU’RE SILENCING THEM DURING THE ELECTION.>>WELL –>>…
00:57:22
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
HALLS OF CONGRESS, OF COURSE,
00:57:24
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
CORPORATIONS CAN LOBBY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IN THE SAME WAY THAT THEY COULD BEFORE THIS LEGISLATION. BUT THIS LEGISLATION IS DESIGNED TO DO, BECAUSE…
00:57:38
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
OPPORTUNITIES TO SPEAK OUTSIDE THE HALLS OF CONGRESS. THE PUBLIC.>>ONE OF THE AMICUS BRIEFS OBJECTS RESPONSE TO JUSTICE KENNEDY’S PROBLEM BY SAYING…
00:58:04
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
OF US — MAYBE SOME — BUT FEW OF US ARE ONLY OUR ECONOMIC INTERESTS. WE’VE BELIEFS, WE HAVE CONVICTIONS, WE HAVE LIKES AND DISLIKES. CORPORATIONS…
00:58:13
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
THE POLITICAL PROCESS IN AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT WAY, AND THIS IS WHAT MAKES THEM SO MUCH MORE DAMAGING.>>WELL, THAT’S NOT — I’M SORRY, BUT THAT SEEMS…
00:58:38
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
THAT CORPORATIONS ARE DIFFERENT THAN INDIVIDUALS IN THAT RESPECT, I JUST DON’T THINK HOLDS UP.>>WELL, ALL I WAS SUGGESTING, MR. CHIEF JUSTICE,…
00:59:04
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
ILLEGAL, PRESUMABLY THAT COMPANY WOULD MAXIMIZE ITS SHAREHOLDERS’ INTEREST BY OPPOSING THE ELECTION OF THAT INDIVIDUAL.>>BUT EVERYTHING IS GEARED…
00:59:18
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
MAXIMIZE REVENUE, IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE VALUE. INDIVIDUALS ARE MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT. SO WHEN CORPORATIONS ENGAGE THE POLITICAL PROCESS, THEY DO…
00:59:33
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
I SUPPOSE SOME DO, BUT LET’S SAY IF YOU HAVE TEN INDIVIDUALSKORPGS WANT US TO DO.>>IF YOU HAVE TEN INDIVIDUALS AND THEY EACH CONTRIBUTE $1,000 TO THE…
00:59:53
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
THE CORPORATION YOU’RE DESCRIBING IS THE CORPORATION OF THE KIND WE HAVE IN THIS CASE, WHERE ONE CAN ASSUME THE
00:59:59
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
MEMBERS ALL SIGN ON TO THE CORPORATION’S IDEOLOGICAL MISSION. WHERE THE CORPORATION, IN FACT, HAS AN IDEOLOGICAL MISSION.>>GENERAL KEEGAN, MOST …
01:00:12
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM THE INDIVIDUAL WHO OWNS THEM. THE LOCAL HAIRDRESSER. THE NEW AUTO DEALERSHIP — DEALER WHO HAS JUST LOST HIS DEALERSHIP AND WHO…
01:00:29
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
MAYBE, HE THINKS WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS HAPPENING OR WHATEVER CONGRESSMAN WON’T TRY TO PATCH IT UP BY GETTING THE AUTO COMPANY TO UNDO IT. THERE’S…
01:01:10
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
CORPORATE FORM OUT SIDE THE CORPORATE FORM. THEY PROBABLY DON’T GET THE TAX BREAK THEY WOULD GET INSIDE THE CORPORATION FORM BUT I’M NOT SURE ANYTHING…
01:01:44
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
OF OPINION IN THE D.C. CIRCUIT. AND I CAME AWAY PT DISTINCT IMPRESSION THAT CONGRESS HAS BUILT AN ENORMOUS RECORD OF SUPPORT FOR THIS BILL IN THE EVIDENCE….
01:01:58
Breyer, Stephen G. – Associate Justice
OLD. THERE WAS A LOT OF INFORMATION IN THAT WHICH SUGGESTED THAT MANY MILLIONS OF VOTERS THINK AT THE LEAST, THAT LARGE CORPORATE AND UNION EXPENDITURES…
01:02:46
Unidentified Speaker
OF OPINION AND TENS OF THOUSANDS OF
01:02:49
Breyer, Stephen G. – Associate Justice
UNDERLYING BITS OF EVIDENCE WHERE THERE MIGHT BE SUPPORT FOR THAT PROPOSITION?>>THAT’S RIGHT, JUSTICE. IN ADDITION TO THE 100-YEAR-OLD JUDGMENT,…
01:03:16
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
THE WAY IN WHICH FUNDRAISING IS IN THE FRONT OF THEIR MIND IN EVERYTHING THEY DO. THE WAY THEY GRANT ACCESS AND INFLUENCE AND THE WAY IN WHICH OUTCOMES…
01:03:52
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
TRACK OF WHAT MY — WHERE I HOLD –>>WELL YOU HAVE A BUSY JOB. YOU CAN’T EXPECT –>>IT’S NOT HAVE A HAVE A BUSY JOB IT’S –>>BUT IT IS EXTRAORDINARY….
01:04:08
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
TO PROTECT SHAREHOLDERS FROM THEMSELVES. THEY MIGHT GIVE MONEY OR BUY SHARES IN A CORPORATION AND THEY DON’T KNOW THAT THE CORPORATION IS TAKING OUT…
01:04:17
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
HAS TO KEEP AN EYE ON THEIR INTEREST.>>
01:04:20
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
I APPRECIATE THAT. IT’S NOT THAT I HAVE
01:04:22
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
A BUSY JOB. IT’S THAT I, LIKE MOST AMERICANS OWN SHARES THROUGH MUTUAL FUNDS. YOU DON’T KNOW WHERE YOUR MUTUAL FUNDS ARE INVESTING SO –>>I UNDERSTAND….
01:04:40
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
MOST PEOPLE OWN STOCK THROUGH MUTUAL FUNDS. IN A WORLD IN WHICH MOST PEOPLE OWN STOCK THROUGH RETIREMENT PLANS WHERE THEY HAVE TO INVEST, THEY HAVE…
01:04:52
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
TO BE ABLE TO MONITOR WHAT EACH COMPANY THEY OWN ASSETS IN IS DOING OR EVEN TO KNOW THE EXTENT OF THIS.>>IN THAT
01:05:00
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
RESPECT IT’S UNLIKE THE UNION BECAUSE THE WORKER WHO DOES NOT WANT TO AFFILIATE WITH THE UNION CANNOT HAVE FUNDS FROM HIS OWN POCKET DEVOTED TO POLITICAL…
01:05:23
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
RIGHT THAT THE UNIONS GIVE BACK, ESSENTIALLY, THE FUNDS THAT ANY UNION MEMBER OR EMPLOYEE IN THE WORKPLACE DOES NOT WANT USED FOR ELECTORAL PURPOSES….
01:05:39
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
DOES THE SHAREHOLDER PROTECTION INTEREST — THERE’S NO PARALLEL FOR THE UNION?>>YOU’RE RIGHT ABOUT THAT. THE GOVERNMENT BELIEVES THAT WITH RESPECT…
01:05:54
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
AND THAT UNIONS SHOULD BE KEPT IN. I THINK WHAT YOUR POINT SUGGESTS, THE UNION MEMBER POINT SUGGESTS WHY CONGRESS THOUGHT THERE WAS A COMPELLING INTEREST…
01:06:07
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
THAT, LET’S SAY, DISSENTING UNION MEMBERS ARE PROTECTED BY THE CONSTITUTION. THERE’S NO STATE ACTION, OF COURSE, SO THERE’S NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT…
01:06:47
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
OF THE QUESTIONS THE CHIEF JUSTICE ASKED ME ABOUT WHAT INTEREST
01:06:50
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
THE GOVERNMENT WAS SUGGESTING MOTIVATED
01:06:52
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
THESE LAWS AND ARE COMPELLING ENOUGH SUCH THAT THIS COURT CERTAINLY SHOULD NOT INVALIDATE
01:06:56
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
THESE LAWS.>>I
01:06:58
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
TAKE THE WE HAVE NEVER ACCEPTED YOUR SHAREHOLDER PROTECTION INTEREST?
01:07:03
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
THIS IS A NEW ARGUMENT?>>YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THAT’S FAIR. CERTAINLY, BILOTTI DOES NOT ACCEPT IT. NATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK IS AN INTERESTING OPINION…
01:07:20
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
BOTH THE SHAREHOLDER PROTECTION ARGUMENT AND THE ANTI-CORRUPTION ARGUMENT WITH RESPECT TO SECTION
01:07:27
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
441.B IN PARTICULAR. IN LATER CASES THE COURT SUGGESTED THAT NATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK WAS ONLY FOCUSED ON CONTRIBUTIONS. IF YOU READ NATIONAL RIGHT…
01:08:15
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
INTEREST AND THE SHAREHOLDER PROTECTION INTEREST.>>WHICH WE THINK WAS IN AUSTIN.>>AUSTIN, I THOUGHT, WAS BASED ON THE AGGREGATION OF IMMENSE WEALTH…
01:08:37
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
MONEY, THAT WHEN THE CORPORATION SPENT THOSE ASSETS –>>
01:08:40
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
CAN YOU GIVE ME THE CITATION OF THE PAGE IN AUSTIN WHERE WE ACCEPTED THE SHAREHOLDER
01:08:45
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
PROTECTION RATIONALE?>>I THINK IT COMES WHEN THE COURT IS DISTINGUISHING MCFL AND THE MESSAGE OF THAT DISTINCTION OF MCFL IS THE SHAREHOLDER PROTECTION…
01:09:01
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
APPEAR IN THE AUSTIN OPINION?>>I HONESTLY DON’T KNOW, MR. CHIEF JUSTICE AND I DON’T WANT TO PUSH THIS TOO
01:09:08
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
FAR.>>LET’S ASSUME THEY DON’T, THEN I’LL GET BACK TO MY QUESTION WHICH IS, YOU’RE ASKING US TO DEFEND THE AUSTIN OR SUPPORT OR CONTINUE THE AUSTIN…
01:09:19
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
RATIONALES THAT WE HAVE NEVER ACCEPTED?
01:09:25
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
SHAREHOLDER PROTECTION AND DID PRO
01:09:30
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
PROOH QUID PRO QUO CORRUPTION.>>THE THING THAT’S CHANGED IS THE RECORD THAT CHANGED AND IT WAS VERY STRONG ON THE NOTION THAT THERE WAS NO DIFFERENCE…
01:09:58
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
TWO COMPELLING INTERESTS WE’VE NEVER ACCEPTED?>>IN THIS PARTICULAR CONTEXT, FAIR ENOUGH.>>AND TO UNDERCUT BUCKLEY IN SO DOING?>>WELL, I DON’T…
01:10:10
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
BUCKLEY WAS ABOUT INDIVIDUALS, RATHER THAN CORPORATIONS. AND BUCKLEY WAS A 1976, NOT A 2009, AFTER THE VERY EXTENSIVE RECORD THAT WAS CREATED IN BIKRA….
01:10:23
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
MAY I ASK ONE QUESTION THAT
01:10:26
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
WAS HIGHLIGHTED IN THE
01:10:28
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
PRIOR ARGUMENT. AND THAT WAS — IF CONGRESS COULD SAY NO TV AND RADIO ADS, COULD IT ALSO SAY NO NEWSPAPER ADS, NO
01:10:45
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
CAMPAIGN BIOGRAPHIES? THE LAST TIME THE ANSWER WAS, YES, CONGRESS COULD BUT IT DIDN’T. IS THAT STILL THE GOVERNMENT’S ANSWER?>>THE GOVERNMENT’S ANSWER…
01:11:16
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
WHAT THE COURT’S OWN REACTION TO SOME OF THOSE HYPOTHETICALS, VERY SERIOUSLY. WE WENT WENT BACK AND CONSIDERED THE MATTER CAREFULLY. AND THE GOVERNMENT’S…
01:12:11
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
HAS NEVER APPLIED THIS STATUTE TO A BOOK TO SAY IT DOESN’T APPLY TO BOOKS IS TO TAKE OFF, ESSENTIALLY, NOTHING FROM THE –>>WE DON’T PUT OUR FIRST…
01:12:27
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
A PAMPHLET?>>I THINK A PAMPHLET WOULD BE DIFFERENT. A PAMPHLET IS PRETTY CLASSIC ELECTION. THIS IS NO ATTEMPT TO SAY THE 441 B ONLY APPLIES TO
01:12:39
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
VIDEO AND NOT TO PRINT.>>WHAT IS THE PARTICULAR — WHAT IF THE PARTICULAR MOVIE INVOLVED HERE HAD NOT BEEN DISTRIBUTED BY THE VIDEO ON DEMAND?
01:12:50
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
SUPPOSE THAT — PEOPLE COULD VIEW IT FOR FREE ON NETFLIX OVER THE INTERNET? SO THAT FREE DVDs WERE PASSED OUT. SUPPOSE PEOPLE COULD ATTEND THE
01:13:01
Alito, Samuel A. Jr. – Associate Justice
MOVIE FOR FREE IN A MOVIE THEATER? EXPOSE THE EXACT TEXT OF THIS WAS DISTRIBUTED IN A PRINTED FORM. IN HEIGHT OF YOUR RETRACTION, I HAVE NO IDEA WHERE…
01:13:38
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
NOBODY IN CONGRESS OR NOBODY IN
01:13:41
Alito, Samuel A. Jr. – Associate Justice
THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPARATUS HAS SUGGESTED THAT BOOKS POSE THIS
01:13:46
Alito, Samuel A. Jr. – Associate Justice
PROBLEM.>>SO YOU’RE A LAWYER ADVISING SOMEBODY THAT’S ABOUT TO COME UP WITH A BOOK AND YOU SAY, DON’T WORRY. THE FEC HAS NEVER TRIED TO SEND SOMEBODY…
01:14:07
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
THIS STATUTE DON’T COVER BOOKS.>>THAT’S EXACTLY RIGHT. THE ONLY STATUTE INVOLVED IN THIS CASE DOES NOT COVER BOOKS. SO 441 B WHICH –>>DOES COVER…
01:14:28
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
EXTRA BOOKS. AND ALSO ONLY
01:14:30
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
APPLIES TO EXPRESSED ADVOCACY. 203 HAS A BROADER CATEGORY OF THE FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT
01:14:37
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
OF
01:14:39
Kagan, Elena – Solicitor General
EXPRESSED ADDND ONE CAN’T MEET THIS AS THE COURT UNDERSTOOD THAT.>>I’M SORRY WE SUGGESTED SOME IN THE LAST ARGUMENT. YOU HAVE A HISSELF RF OF UNION…
01:15:55
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
IS GROUNDED IN
01:15:57
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
INTERESTS THAT ARE SO
01:15:58
Waxman, Seth P. – Attorney
COMPELLING THAT 52 YEARS AGO, BEFORE BUCKLEY WAS DECIDED. BEFORE FECA WAS ENACTED. BEFORE BUCKLEY-STYLE QUID PRO QUO CORRUPTION WAS EVER ADDRESSED…
01:17:22
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
THE PROFESSOR WAS EITHER, MR. CHIEF JUSTICE BUT I RECALL PRETTY WELL THE HISTORY THAT WAS RECOUNTED — I WOULD SAY THE HISTORY RECOUNTED BY THIS COURT…
01:17:42
Waxman, Seth P. – Attorney
HAD A CASE UNTIL THIS COURT SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER. WE’VE NEVER HAD A CASE THAT CHALLENGED DIRECTLY, QUOTE, AUSTIN AND AUSTIN-STYLE CORRUPTION, WHICH…
01:18:52
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
ADJUDICATION OF IT AND THE PREHISTORY OF
01:18:59
Waxman, Seth P. – Attorney
TAFT-HARTLEY, BETWEEN CONTRIBUTION EXPENDITURES. WHAT IT SAID, AND I’M QUOTING FROM THE SPEECH WHICH IS PARTLY REPRINTED IN THIS COURT’S OPINION IN McCONNELL,…
01:19:53
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
AND THE TRUSTS OF THE ROOT ERA. YOU’RE TALKING MAINLY ABOUT SMALL BUSINESS CORPORATIONS.>>JUSTICE SCALIA, I TAKE YOUR POINT AND I THINK YOU’VE…
01:20:25
Waxman, Seth P. – Attorney
IT GOES TO THE VERY FOUNDATION OF THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLICAN EXERCISE. THAT IS, THE NOTION OF INTEGRITY AND REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT. NOW THIS CASE,…
01:21:01
Scalia, Antonin – Associate Justice
TO 441 B OR A STATE LAW ANALOG AND SAY, YOU KNOW, I AM NOT THE PROBLEM THAT THEODORE ROOSEVELT AND LSU ROOT WAS ADDRESSED AT. THERE ISN’T A
01:21:14
Waxman, Seth P. – Attorney
COMPEL COMPELLING INTEREST BECAUSE I ONLY HAVE THREE EMPLOYEES AND $8 IN A BANK ACCOUNT. THAT’S FINE. BUTS WHAT TRULY EXTRAORDINARY, GIVEN THE SENTIMENTS…
01:22:02
Kennedy, Anthony M. – Associate Justice
APPLIED APPLIED A CONTRIBUTIONS NOT TO THOSE KINDS OF EXPENDITURES.>>JUSTICE KENNEDY, FIRST OF ALL, I THINK IT IS ACTUALLY TRUE THAT PATENTS ARE…
01:22:29
Waxman, Seth P. – Attorney
CORPORATIONS CAN AND DO SPEAK ABOUT A WIDE RANGE OF PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES AND SINCE THE CONTROLLING OPINION WAS ISSUED IN WISCONSIN RIGHT TO LIFE,…
01:23:15
Alito, Samuel A. Jr. – Associate Justice
WITH SOUND BYTES, THE POINT IS THAT WHAT AUSTIN WAS TO BE SURE, THE VERY FIRST CASE IN WHICH THIS COURT HAD TO DECIDE ACTUALLY HAD
01:23:31
Waxman, Seth P. – Attorney
TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT THE PROHIBITION ON CORPORATE-FUNDED CAMPAIGN SPEECH COULD BE PROPERLY LIMITED AND SUPPORTED BY A COMPELLING INTEREST. ALL I’M…
01:24:36
Alito, Samuel A. Jr. – Associate Justice
THAT IT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL? IT’S BEEN ACCEPTED UP UNTIL THIS POINT BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC THAT THIS IS CONSTITUTIONAL? NO. THAT’S NOT REGARDED AS AN…
01:25:12
Waxman, Seth P. – Attorney
THAT IT IMPOSES PASSES STRICT SCRUTINY. FAIR ENOUGH. BUT THE QUESTION HAS TO BE READS. THE ISSUE HAS TO BE RAISED. IF AUSTIN, JUSTICE ALITO, OR THE…
01:25:52
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
SHOWED.>>THAT’S BECAUSE — I ASSUME I HAVE YOUR PERMISSION TO ANSWER?>>YES.>>THE ONLY CHALLENGES THAT WERE LITIGATED IN THE DISTRICT COURT –…
01:26:13
Waxman, Seth P. – Attorney
AND ALL I’M SAYING IS THAT IF YOU
01:26:17
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
WANT TO
01:26:20
Waxman, Seth P. – Attorney
RE-EXAMINE THE PREDICATES, THE INTEREST THAT CONGRESS IS GOING BACK A WHETHER IT’S 60 YEARS OR 100 YEARS AND COURTS, WHETHER IT HAS BEEN THE ACTUAL…
01:27:16
Roberts, John G. Jr. – Chief Justice
AND BAN SPEECH BY CORPORATIONS.
01:27:20
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
NOW WE LEARN CONTRARY TO WHAT WE HEARD IN MARCH, THAT BOOKS COULDN’T BE PROHIBITED BUT PAMPHLETS COULD BE PROHIBITED. WE ALSO LEARNED –>>THAT’S NOT…
01:27:52
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader – Associate Justice
FEC IS NOW WILLING TO RECEDE FROM ITS REGULATIONS WHICH EXPLICITLY COVERED THIS CORPORATION AND I
01:27:59
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
DON’T KNOW, AS I STAND HERE TODAY, WHAT KIND OF CORPORATIONS THE GOVERNMENT WOULD CHOOSE TO PROSECUTE. REMEMBER, THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION,…
01:28:34
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
SOLVE THE PROBLEM FOR MY CLIENT’S CORPORATION.>>BUT IT WOULD SOLVE IT FOREFOR THE ADVERTISING. THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. THE HILLARY DOCUMENT…
01:28:42
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
THE ADVERTISEMENTS. IT WOULD COVER THOSE. BUT THEY ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT ARE CLEARLY VIOLATESING THE STATUTE.>>THE OVERBREADTH OF THIS STATUTE SOLVES…
01:28:57
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
WEAR A SCARLET LETTER THAT SAYS, C, IF YOU ACCEPT ONE DOLLAR OF FUNDING AND YOU BETTER MAKE DARN SURE WHEN A CHECK COMES IN FOR $100 FROM THE XYZ…
01:29:11
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
CORPORATION YOU USED TO MAKE A DOCUMENTARY ABOUT A CANDIDATE. THE OTHER WAY IN WHICH THE GOVERNMENT’S POSITION HAS CHANGED IS WE DO NOT KNOW AS –>>…
01:29:39
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
SUBMITTING, JUSTICE STEPHENS THAT THAT’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL. I THINK WHAT YOU’RE SUGGESTING
01:29:43
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
IS THAT SOME LIG LIMITATION, WHAT YOU’RE SUGGESTING IS NOT A
01:29:48
Stevens, John Paul – Associate Justice
WHOLE LOT DIFFERENT THAN PACK. IT WOULD LEAD — I THINK IT WAS AN ACCOUNTING NIGHTMARE. IT WOULD
01:29:53
Olson, Theodore B. – Attorney
BE –>>BUT IT’S A NIGHTMARE CONGRESS ENDORSED IN THE SNOW V JEFFERSON –>>BUT THE WELLSTONE AMENDMENT REPEALED –>>WE’VE HELD THAT THIS LITERALLY…
01:30:17
Unidentified Speaker
POSITION?>>WE DON’T. AND IT WOULDN’T EXEMPT MY CLIENTS. THE THIRD WAY IN WHICH THE
01:30:22
Unidentified Speaker
GOVERNMENT’S
01:30:23
Unidentified Speaker
CHANGED ITS POSITION IS ITS RATIONALE FOR 24 PROHIBITION
01:30:29
Unidentified Speaker
IN THE FIRST PLACE. IS IT CORRUPTION? IS IT EQUALIZATION? WITH SOME DISPUTE I HEARD THE SOLICITOR GENERAL SAS THE
01:30:36
Unidentified Speaker
EQUALIZATION RATIONALE WAS SOMETHING THE GOVERNMENT DISAVOWED.
01:30:39
Unidentified Speaker
IT WASN’T WHAT AUSTIN SAID THE GOVERNMENT SAID. AND –>>JUSTICE MARSHALL SAID HE WAS NOT TRYING TO EQUALIZE ALL VOICES IN THE POLITICAL PROCESS. …
01:31:05
Unidentified Speaker
THOSE ADVANTAGES UNIQUE TO THE CORPORATE FORM IS THE STATE’S COMPELLING INTEREST IN THIS CASE. THAT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE EQUALIZATION. I DON’T KNOW….
01:31:19
Unidentified Speaker
ABOUT SOMETHING THAT’S MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT GOES ON IN OUR DEMOCRACY. I’M TOLD IT’S A FELONY. I’M NOT — AND I DON’T KNOW WHAT THE RATIONAL…
01:32:09
Unidentified Speaker
ADVANTAGES TO AGGREGATE WEALTH AND THEN WE MUST TAKE AWAY THE ADVANTAGE BY EQUALIZING THE PROCESS. I THINK THAT’S PLAIN MEANING. BUT MY POINT IS, I…
01:32:24
Unidentified Speaker
OVERBROAD STATUTE THAT COVERS EVERY CORPORATION, IRRESPECTIVE OF WHAT THE STOCK HOLDERS THINK. IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER IT’S BIG OR GENERAL — A…
01:32:40
Unidentified Speaker
WAS OFFERED FOR — OFFERED TO
01:32:42
Unidentified Speaker
THE PUBLIC FOR ITS VIEW, WHAT MEDIA MIGHT BE COVERED. WHAT TYPE OF CORPORATION MIGHT BE COVERED. AND WHAT COMPELLING JU JUSTIFICATION OR NARROW STANDARD…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *