Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRepublicans ask the Supreme Court to gut one of the last limits on money in politics - Ian Millhiser @ Vox
Vox - Gift LinkThere is a specter of inevitability hanging over much of the Supreme Courts current term. It is unlikely that any legal argument could persuade the Courts Republican majority to uphold bans on anti-LGBTQ+ conversion therapy, for example, or to preserve the Voting Rights Act. These are issues where Republican judges have wildly divergent views from Democratic jurists. And, on a 6-3 Republican Court, that means that the GOPs view wins.
That specter looms particularly large over National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) v. FEC, which the Supreme Court will hear on Tuesday, December 9. In that case, the GOP asks the justices to repeal a complicated campaign finance scheme limiting the amount of money big donors can funnel to candidates. And, given this Courts history in campaign finance cases, it is all but certain that Republicans will win this case.
Few issues split the two parties more cleanly than campaign finance regulation. Broadly speaking, the Democratic justices believe that too much money in politics is inherently corrupting, because, as Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in a 2014 dissent, a few large donations can drown out the voices of the many.
Under this view, big campaign donations breed a government that is responsive only to a small group of very wealthy donors. In Breyers words, where enough money calls the tune, the general public will not be heard.
That specter looms particularly large over National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) v. FEC, which the Supreme Court will hear on Tuesday, December 9. In that case, the GOP asks the justices to repeal a complicated campaign finance scheme limiting the amount of money big donors can funnel to candidates. And, given this Courts history in campaign finance cases, it is all but certain that Republicans will win this case.
Few issues split the two parties more cleanly than campaign finance regulation. Broadly speaking, the Democratic justices believe that too much money in politics is inherently corrupting, because, as Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in a 2014 dissent, a few large donations can drown out the voices of the many.
Under this view, big campaign donations breed a government that is responsive only to a small group of very wealthy donors. In Breyers words, where enough money calls the tune, the general public will not be heard.
The Supreme Court will hear National Republican Senatorial Committee (âNRSCâ) v. FEC on Tuesday, December 9. In that case, the GOP asks the justices to repeal a complicated campaign finance scheme limiting the amount of money big donors can funnel to candidates.
— Vox (@vox.com) 2025-12-03T16:29:35.899Z
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Republicans ask the Supreme Court to gut one of the last limits on money in politics - Ian Millhiser @ Vox (Original Post)
In It to Win It
8 hrs ago
OP
Traildogbob
(12,310 posts)1. Why not
thats why they put them there, to follow orders. Earn their pay.
Bayard
(28,115 posts)2. Cramping their style, is it?
I have no confidence in the Sick Six doing the right thing when they have their own funnels.
Not even going to bother hiding the corruption any longer.