Citizens United loses in Montana, Supreme Court upholds state ban on corporate spending


The Montana Supreme Court is apparently much wiser than the U.S. Supreme Court. The Montana judges have ruled in favor of a 100-year-old ban on direct corporate spending on political candidates in their state.

If rulings like this were contagious, I'd personally make every effort to spread anti-Citizens United germs all over Justices Scalia, Alito, Roberts, and Thomas. That law is the worst thing that's happened to this country in a very long time, and has caused even semi-quasi-demi-partially sane candidates to blurt out declarations like this...

... and has enabled the most vile of the vile to raise unlimited quantities of very influential cash to buy votes for even more vile candidates. And because of that, democracy takes a hit, because ordinary, well-qualified, smart, creative people who will never live in mansions and employ "chair slaves" know they don't stand a chance against Candidate Moneybags, and so they forgo a run.

But then something like the Montana case happens, and for a fleeting moment, we break into...

Via The Missoulian:

Western Tradition Partnership, a conservative political group based in Washington, D.C., and others had successfully argued in state District Court that the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission rendered the Montana law unconstitutional. District Judge Jeffrey Sherlock had ruled in their favor.

But the Supreme Court majority saw it differently.

The vote was 5-2. Let's hope this becomes a trend.

Come on, we can dream, can't we?

Big h/t: @Ilikewoods