Proposition 59 Case Analysis

A Supreme court considers having corporations to have a first amendment right to use an unlimited amount of money for influencing elections. The current president denounced it during a state of the union address while having many Justices present. A poll was found that it should be overturned. The outcome was viewed as outrageous but does it require amending the Constitution. It is currently the question California people will be thinking about this November when they think about Proposition 59, This Proposition asked if the state elected officials could possibly use all of the constitutional authority. Not only proposing and ratifying one or more amendments for the U.S. Constitution to change citizens united and related decisions. If they had their way, the question wouldn’t be on the ballot. The people urged Governor Brown to veto the legislation that allowed it to exist because other propositions that were brought up to the people in the group of well-known democracy, Proposition 59 has no backing force. …show more content…
(The Times Editorial Board) The question is now on ballot, voters will choose. Some recommend a No vote for a couple reasons. Amending the Constitution is a hard and was design that way. Not often an unwise supreme Court decision justifies the attempt. The Citizens United, decided a couple years ago 5-4 majority, could be reconsidered or narrowed with having a different court’s membership. Hilary Clinton has stated that she would choose Justices likely to choose the ruling. She has also stated that she would choose to fight for a constitutional amendment to change the ruling if it was not changed. They do not see why they should not support an appropriately crafted constitutional amendment possibly in the future but there should not be a