Rule of law

On Your Mark, Get Set, Lie: Supreme Court Weighs Truth in Politics by Massimo Calabresi, April 22, 2014

Bush and Cheney are war criminals, says former Bush counterterrorism official by David Phillips, Las Vegas Democrat Examiner, May 29, 2014

The SuperRich in America Have Become ‘Untouchables’ Who Don’t Go to Prison / By Amy Goodman and Matt Taibbi, Democracy Now, April 15, 2014   posted on alternet,org 

Chris Hedges: We’re Losing the Last Shreds of Legal Rights to Protect Ourselves from Oligarchy By Chris Hedges, Truthdig, posted on Alternet.org, May 5, 2014

Supreme Court ruling gives small number of wealthy donors new ways to drive campaigns By Matea Gold, Washington Post, April 2, 2014

The People Who Break the Rules Have Raked in Huge Profits and Wealth and It’s Sickening Our Politics by Joseph Stiglitz,  September 11, 2013 

How Conservatives Abandoned Judicial Restraint, Took Over The Courts And Radically Transformed America

Long Before McCutcheon, Conservatives Invested in Pushing Our Legal Culture Rightward http://billmoyers.com/2014/04/11/long-before-mccutcheon-conservatives-invested-in-pushing-our-legal-culture-rightward/

A Blistering Dissent in ‘McCutcheon’: Conservatives Substituted Opinion for Fact http://billmoyers.com/2014/04/02/a-blistering-dissent-in-mccutcheon-conservatives-substituted-opinion-for-fact/

 

 

Government = Protection Racket for the 1 Percent by Bill Moyers and Michael Winship, BillMoyers.com, April 21, 2014 http://billmoyers.com/2014/04/21/government-protection-racket-for-the-1-percent/

 

 

 

How Conservatives Abandoned Judicial Restraint, Took Over The Courts And Radically Transformed America By Ian Millhiser on November 19, 2013

Long Before McCutcheon, Conservatives Invested in Pushing Our Legal Culture Rightward by Joshua Holland, Bill Moyers.com April 11, 2014

A Blistering Dissent in ‘McCutcheon’: Conservatives Substituted Opinion for Fact By Bill Moyers, billmoyers.com, April 2, 2014  Excerpt…The court’s four-member minority issued a blistering dissent, written by Justice Stephen Breyer. He charged that the majority’s “conclusion rests upon its own, not a record-based, view of the facts.” Its legal analysis is faulty: It misconstrues the nature of the competing constitutional interests at stake. It understates the importance of protecting the political integrity of our governmental institutions. It creates a loophole that will allow a single individual to contribute millions of dollars to a political party or to a candidate’s campaign. Taken together with Citizens United, Breyer writes that McCutcheon “eviscerates our Nation’s campaign finance laws, leaving a remnant incapable of dealing with the grave problems of democratic legitimacy that those laws were intended to resolve.”…But perhaps the dissent’s most withering criticism of the ruling is that, as in Citizens United, it was decided according to the majority’s beliefs, rather than the factual record. In the past, when evaluating the constitutionality of campaign finance restrictions, we have typically relied upon an evidentiary record amassed below to determine whether the law served a compelling governmental objec­tive. And, typically, that record contained testimony from Members of Congress (or state legislators) explaining why Congress (or the legislature) acted as it did….If we are to overturn an act of Congress here, we should do so on the basis of a similar record….

Comments are closed.