Text of the Citizens United Constitutional Amendment
That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the
Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents
and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the
legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:
“Section 1. To advance democratic self-government and political
equality, and to protect the integrity of government and the electoral
process, Congress and the States may regulate and set reasonable limits
on the raising and spending of money by candidates and others to
“Section 2. Congress and the States shall have power to implement
and enforce this article by appropriate legislation, and may
distinguish between natural persons and corporations or other
artificial entities created by law, including by prohibiting such
entities from spending money to influence elections.
“Section 3. Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant
Congress or the States the power to abridge the freedom of the
Calendar No. 471
S. J. RES. 19
Here is the full text of the resolution including an earlier version:
Keep reading this post . . .
Coming Soon to a Screen Near You: ‘Fast Terry’
Citizens United, the group whose decision to make an anti-Hillary Clinton documentary triggered a landmark Supreme Court case on the First Amendment and political speech, is working on another film: “Fast Terry.”
McAuliffe will probably brag about it, as it’s just one more thing he has in common with Hillary Clinton.
UPDATE: The full “Fast Terry” movie can now be viewed in its entirety here.
So, Democrats, Should We Limit Campaign Donations or Not?
Remember when the Citizens United court case was the root of all evil? Well, now a Democratic super PAC is suing to allow unlimited donations in their effort to help Democratic candidates for the state legislature:
A Washington DC “super PAC” has sued New Jersey’s campaign finance watchdog agency, saying the state can’t limit how much it can raise from an individual donor.
The Fund for Jobs and Growth filed the complaint against the state Election Law Enforcement Commission (ELEC) in federal district court on Friday.
The group, organized under Section 527 of the IRS code, plans to make independent expenditures on behalf of Democratic state legislative candidates in this year’s election. It argues that under the 2010 Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. FEC, it’s unconstitutional to limit how much money it can raise from an individual donor.
Last year, President Obama declared that the Citizens United decision was so harmful to society, that “I think we need to seriously consider mobilizing a constitutional amendment process to overturn Citizens United (assuming the Supreme Court doesn’t revisit it).”
Will he denounce an effort by allies within his own party to eliminate limits on donations to state campaigns?