Over at Slate, Richard Hasen claims that the Supreme Court’s call for reargument of Citizens United v. FEC is a prelude to the Roberts Court overturning Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, the decision that allowed limits on corporate spending in elections.
Some people believe that the influence of money in politics is, in Larry Lessig’s words, “not the most important problem, [but] the first problem,”—the problem we have to deal with before we can properly fix any of our other problems, just as an alcoholic needs to fix her alcoholism before she can fix her other, bigger problems. It almost goes without saying that turning a firehose of corporate money towards politicians’ campaign coffers would be akin to offering an alcoholic unlimited free drinks.
