An article in the Las Vegas Sun entitled "A chance for both parties to undo Supreme court's damage" states that The Supreme Court's ruling was "a shocking instance of judicial overreach and reflected an utter indifference to ho politics actually works.
This article is referring to the 5-4 ruling in the Citizens United case in January. The Supreme Court's ruling allows corporate spending to influence elections.
How is this an judicial overreach? Where in the constitution does it say that campaign contributions should be limited by anyone?
Just because we don't agree with a decision doesn't mean that it is not the correct decision based on law.
The United States was founded as a Republic which is ruled by law. It is becoming a socialist democracy which was feared by the founders of this country.
When Benjamin Franklin left the Constitutional Convention, he was asked by a woman, “Sir, what have you given us?” He replied, “A Republic, ma’am, if you can keep it.”
Alexander Hamilton said, “We are a Republican Government. Real liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of democracy.”
The Supreme Court has made some "shocking" decisions, but this isn't one of them. It is important that we are ruled by law or we will lose our freedom to the whims of whoever has control.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment