The real danger behind the ‘McCutcheon’ ruling

From Discourse DB
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

This is an opinion item.

Author(s) Ruth Marcus
Source The Washington Post
Date April 4, 2014
Quotes-start.png In McCutcheon, Roberts oversaw the metastasis of Kennedy’s unrealistic test from expenditures to contributions. A politician receiving one humongous check, with proceeds to be distributed among candidates and party committees, will naturally be “grateful” to the donor but will not feel “obligated” in a way that constitutes corruption, he asserted, happily substituting his judgment about what is corrupting for that of members of Congress who might actually know. Quotes-end.png

Add or change this opinion item's references

This item argues against the position Supreme Court voted correctly on the topic McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission.