Personal tools

Argument: Media speech implicates shareholders; no different with other companies

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

Supreme Court majority January 21, 2010 opinion on Citizens United vs Federal Election Commission: "3) The Government’s asserted interest in protecting share-holders from being compelled to fund corporate speech, like the anti-distortion rationale, would allow the Government to ban political speech even of media corporations. The statute is underinclusive; it only protects a dissenting shareholder’s interests in certain media for 30 or 60 days before an election when such interests would be implicated in any media at any time."

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits