Justices Signal High Court May Rethink Citizens United
Ginsburg, Breyer say real-world results rebut original ruling
By Mark Russell, Newser Staff
Posted Feb 19, 2012 7:01 AM CST
Supreme Court Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer listen to President Barack Obama's State of the Union address on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Jan. 24, 2012.   (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

(Newser) – The Supreme Court on Friday blocked a Montana Supreme Court ruling against corporate campaign funding, appearing once again to support the unlimited corporate spending it allowed with the Citizens United case of 2010. But maybe not? Comments in Friday's order by justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer hint that they're unhappy with the results of that infamous case, reports the Washington Post.

The results of Montana and elsewhere "make it exceedingly difficult to maintain that independent expenditures by corporations ‘do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption,’” wrote Ginsburg, who, along with Breyer, was in the minority opinion on Citizens United. The Supreme Court could simply overturn the Montana Court, and it has no timeline to respond. But the Montana case "will give the Court an opportunity to consider whether, in light of the huge sums currently deployed to buy candidates' allegiance, Citizens United should continue to hold sway," Ginsburg wrote.

More From Newser
My Take on This Story
To report an error on this story,
notify our editors.
Justices Signal High Court May Rethink Citizens United is...
Show results without voting
You Might Like
Showing 3 of 52 comments
May 6, 2012 3:06 AM CDT
Since Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia disgraced the honor and integrity of the court by secretly traveling to the Koch brothers mansion in Palm Springs the weekend the Kochs were planning strategy on how best to argue their "citizens united" case when it came before the court, Thomas and Scalia willfully participated in a conflict of interest. They flew back to Washington, failed to disclose their trip to the Kochs, and worse, the fact that Thomas committed 9 counts of felony perjury when he swore under oath that his wife had no income-nine years in a row. Ginny Thomas, in fact, made over $2 million in that period of time working as a lobbyist for a firm with close ties to the Koch brothers. Thomas signed the conflict of interest forms disclosure forms, and swore UNDER OATH AND PENALTY OF FELONY PERJURY INCLUDING BOTH FINES AND IMPRISONMENT, Thomas's lies were discovered under the Freedom of Information Act. He was actulally ALLOWED TO REFILE AMENDED FORMS after he claimed that he made an "unfortunate error." Thomas is either extremely arrogant and believes he is above the law, or he is one stupid human being. In either case, he and Scalia should be impeached Immediately. The media has pretty much ignored this story, involving these two UN-Justices who have tainted the reputation and the honor of the Supreme Court. These two provided the tying and winning votes for their FRIENDS citizens united case. Both need to be impeached, and Thomas needs to be tried for willful felony perjury. This is not about politics, if any democratic appointees are found to particiapate in willful conflicts of interest, they need to be booted at the same time. If the Supreme Court is allowed to ignore the law, then how can any judge in this country be expected to perform in their job with integrity and honor? Unfortunately, the republicans control the house judiciary committee and the ethics committee, so you can be sure that nothing will be done about these two partisan crooks..
Feb 20, 2012 1:44 PM CST
People who argue against the ruling because they don't like the results don't understand how our government works. Shame on them for letting us all know such an embarrassing fact. The campaign finance law was unconstitutional. It is then up to congress to write one that passes constitutional grounds. The Supreme court has nothing to do with that. Nor does it or should it care about the results. Correcting the results are the job of congress. The court knows that, so just because two mistakes, Ginsberg and Breyer, think they should be allowed to make law from the bench doesn't mean the court will or should rule differently. It is up to congress to solve this. If you know know and understand that fact, shut up until you do.
Feb 20, 2012 8:01 AM CST
Republicans are getting their just desserts. Billionaires are bankrolling R-Money who is in no way, shape, or form an electable candidate in the general election. Karma is such as bitch!