Alito defends Citizens United decision, cites newspapers, TV in corporate campaign spending adjudication
WASHINGTON — Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito is defending the court's 2010 decision in the Citizens United case that helped fuel hundreds of millions of dollars of spending by independent groups in the just-concluded campaign season.
Alito told about 1,500 people at a Federalist Society dinner this week that the First Amendment protects political speech, whether from an individual or a corporation. His comments to the mostly conservative and Republican crowd were part of his broader analysis of arguments put forth by the Obama administration in recent years that Alito said would curtail individual freedoms in favor of stronger federal power.
He said opponents of the 5-4 decision have conducted an effective, but misleading, public relations campaign by stressing that the court extended free speech rights to corporations.
He even praised opponents' pithy cleverness, noting such bumper stickers as "Life Does Not Begin at Incorporation."
But Alito rattled off the names of the nation's leading newspapers and television networks, all owned by corporations and possessing acknowledged rights to print and say what they wish about politics and government.
"The question is whether speech that goes to the very heart of government should be limited to certain preferred corporations; namely, media corporations," he said. "Surely the idea that the First Amendment protects only certain privileged voices should be disturbing to anybody who believes in free speech."
It was not the first time Alito has taken on critics of the outcome in the Citizens United case. At President Barack Obama's State of the Union address soon after the court's ruling in January 2010, the president said the court "reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections."
Alito, sitting with five other justices, was seen to mouth, "Not true."
- Photo gallery: Tornado rips Oklahoma suburb
- Top scandals and controversies of each United...
- Huge tornado hits Oklahoma City suburb, kills...
- Journalists criticize Obama administration,...
- Fly a flag for Cody: Army confirms Utah man...
- Mile-wide tornado churns through Oklahoma...
- 'Star Trek: Into Darkness' does $70.6M but...
- Oklahoma, other tornado-hit states brace for...
- Mitt Romney talks IRS, AP records,...
65 - Associated Press CEO calls records...
23 - White House insists Obama was not...
22 - Journalists push back against Obama...
21 - House chairman sees IRS targeting as...
16 - Republicans try to link IRS scandal,...
12 - Tea party looks to take advantage of...
12 - Supreme Court to weigh in on...
12




Alito is dead wrong. How is it that a corporation has more free speech than an individual? Why is money the standard for free speech? Why does a fictional entity even have rights under the Bill of Rights? A newspaper will not hide in anonymity like More..
To Cats 8:09 a.m. Nov. 18, 2012
Free speech is free speech.
-----------------
True, but a corporation is not a person. People, not corporations, have the constitutional right to free speech. The Citizens United case
Cats: Free speech is not free speech. I can name you multiple reasons that free speech is denied, such as yelling fire in a public building, joking about blowing up a plane, making threats, but not going through with them, against the president or More..