For several decades, we've seen judges appointed, not based on their credentials or the brilliance of their legal reasoning, but rather based on hyperpartisanship and their willingness to embrace extremist positions, including overturning Roe v. Wade. 1/ latimes.com/politics/story…
Our judiciary is much dumber as a result, and we're now poised to see an all out assault on women's reproductive rights, coming from so-called "originalist" judges who are actively legislating from the bench. 2/
I'm not optimistic about this coming decision, and I expect to see another opinion that defies logic, precedent, and the plain text of the law and the Constitution to reach its intended result. 3/
To those of you who RESISTED in the past two election cycles, I'd say keep your walking shoes ready and your phones handy.
We're going to need to keep winning elections to secure our democracy and our basic rights against those who would take these from us. ✊ 4/4
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
11 years ago yesterday, Citizens United was decided, one of the worst opinions in modern Supreme Court history.
Citizens United has been criticized for lots of reasons. One that I and others have made is it creates conflicts w/ state corporate law. 1/ digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjreg/vol33/is…
The Court's decision essentially ignores shareholders who may not want their investments used for political activity, summarily dismissing these concerns as ones that can be addressed through the "procedures of corporate democracy," despite ample evidence that may not be true. 2/
And it completely ignores non-shareholders, embracing the discredited view that shareholders "own" the corporation, even when it is clear that other stakeholders (such as creditors, employees, and pensioners) have significant ownership claims to the corporate treasury. 3/