Ronald Dworkin's Article: The Decision That Threats Democracy

Improved Essays
In the article “The Decision That Threatens Democracy” by Ronald Dworkin, the author explains how the Court’s Citizens United decision will negatively affect the politics in the United States because the decision allows corporations to donate any amount of money in electoral elections to the candidate of their preference. The author cites a poll that says that 80 percent of the people polled agree that corporations that help officials in their campaigns will receive “special consideration” when “matters arise that affects these corporations and organizations.” Dworkin says that after the Watergate scandals in 1971 congress passed laws, limiting the amount of money corporations could donate to prevent future corruption. However Justice Kennedy …show more content…
Smith, the author says that the ruling in Citizens United is a way to protect political speech and that it will not affect elections because in the past, big corporation have not shown interest in participating in politics. The author start its article by emphasizing how before the ruling of Citizens United the government was able to banned books, and he cites Justice Alito saying “I find that pretty incredible”. The author mentions that by the time the court gave its decision in Citizens United case 28 states in the United State already allowed corporations to donate unlimited amounts of money to political campaigns. He also states that small businesses are more likely to participate in political campaigns than big corporations, yet they would not have the money to make a difference in a presidential race. From a personal point of view the Citizens United ruling is good in the way that it will allowed corporations to publish books or films. However I don’t think corporations fall into the category of free speech because they are not real people. Moreover Smith says that 28 states already allow corporations to donate unlimited amounts of money. But he does not mention which states, it could be that those states are already Republican or Democrat states that means corporations have no incentive to use their money in a race they know they will lose …show more content…
In my opinion corporations should have the right to “freedom of press” so they can publish information that can be necessary for the people to make a decision in a political campaign. However corporations are not real people with feelings therefore I don’t think they should have the “freedom of speech” because they can interpret it in a way as in Citizens Unites case allowing them to use large amounts of money in ads that could potentially change the outcome of an electoral race. And I am against that because the decision to elect officials is only “of the people, by the people, for the

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Moreover, in regards to the First Amendment rights given to citizens, those in favor of the Citizens United reform argue that corporations as well are entitled to these freedom of expression/speech rights; that by limiting corporate expenditures on behalf of candidates running for public offices diminishes their freedom to speak. Corporations argue that political speech is aimed at informing the electorate and therefore their allowance to spend unlimitedly is fundamental for spreading information. In contrasting such argument, Dworkin discusses that neither the quantity nor the…

    • 755 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This case did not deal with speech; however it dealt with the question to whether or not a non-profit corporation had the right to show a documentary, this would place the case under the issue of freedom of the press. However the court did not use the Freedom of the Press Clause instead it applied the First Amendment right of free speech to Citizens United a non-profit organization. The majority found that corporations have a voice and have a vested interest in informing the electorate. The majority found that the government’s regulation or censorship to control thought “to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he or she may not hear” Concluding that the “First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves.” The majority found the restriction of though unlawful and applied this to corporations. With a broad interpretation of who citizens were, the majority finds that limiting the speech of corporations is suppressing a important outlet of communication.…

    • 873 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Corporations shouldn’t be treated as people because people may start claiming the rights that corporations have, corporations wouldn’t get punished fairly for crimes, and they would be able to give limitless amounts of money to political campaigns and candidates. People would try to claim the same rights that corporations have. Since corporations don’t pay taxes, people wouldn’t want to…

    • 480 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The bottom line is that corporate actions meant to influence a decision in favor of personal gains are unethical, regardless of whether or not lobbying remains legal. Mega-corporations rarely dump millions of dollars into federal and state campaigns for the benefit of American citizens – they are driven by profit motives. An additional ethical implication of corporate lobbying is a specter of “corporate nepotism” that restricts the profession of lobbying to those who have previous connections in Washington or Wall Street, while excluding those who don’t. Consequently, corporate lobbying remains a closed-circuit process limited to only the most influential actors. In the 2012 election cycle, nearly one-third of the $6 billion in identifiable…

    • 738 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    2010 Supreme Court Case

    • 1099 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The steady growth in the number of lobbyists means more and more influence of the corporate agenda over politicians, who were put in the positions that they are in to represent the middle-class majority, not corporate billionaires. According to the Supreme Court corporations and unions are protected under the first amendment, and should be allowed to spend unlimited amounts of money for the indirect political funding of campaigns. The ruling stated that because the funds were not being spent in coordination with the campaign, they do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption (Dunbar). How is it that a corporation that spends $30 million in order to elect a senator or deter the election of an opposing senator is not seen as corruption? The Supreme Court alleges that the super PACs funding is not coordinated with the campaign, however they are.…

    • 1099 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Media Censorship

    • 1255 Words
    • 6 Pages

    The government is responsible for protecting its citizens, and I for one do not feel like I my rights and freedoms are completely safe. I do not want to be controlled by a business. I do not want my children to be influenced by the things they see on television. I want the media to be independently owned not by a company, but rather one person from within that media outlet. In order to take down corporate ownership, the government needs to enforce the regulations they have had set in place for over seventy years ago, the American public needs to become educated on what is going on around them, and the censorship of the media by these corporations must end.…

    • 1255 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Super Prc Pros And Cons

    • 1622 Words
    • 6 Pages

    They believe unlimited funds being raised will create corruption and will violate the average citizen 's political equality. During Obama 's participation in the presidential election in 2012 he spoke out against Super PACs. Obama was criticized because he had Super PACs that supported him. However, Obama 's campaigns were organized by average citizen and many average citizens donated to Obama 's campaign. "Obama, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul and Rick Santorum are getting between 47 percent and 49 percent from small donors, according to OpenSecrets.org" (Super PACs send price of 'free ' speech).…

    • 1622 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This way, officials are compelled pander to what they should, the majority of citizens, rather than a select group of millionaires and billionaires. In addition, formulating a law that ensures that lobbying is illegal would halt much of the control that corporations have over the United States’ political system, as this would stop officials from receiving gifts and arranging deals with big business representatives. Hence, with large company contributions out of the way, citizens may feel that their representatives would be more likely to listen to their…

    • 700 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    States across the country are passing new voter ID laws. These laws happen to be supported strongly by Republicans and disapproved strongly by Democrats. The big question seems to be, does the new laws matter? The Indiana Supreme Court don’t think it matters. Dan Carden, writer from The Times (Munster, Indiana), wrote that, “Justice Brent Dickson [said] requiring an ID to vote is no different than requiring people to show ID to board an airplane, enter a federal building or cash a check.” Most people have IDs anyway, so requiring an ID wouldn’t make a difference in the process.…

    • 712 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    As muckraker David Graham Phillips said during the early 1900s “the senators are not elected by the people, they are elected by the “interests””. Big businesses would fund political candidate’s election and in return the candidate would vote in the businesses favor instead of the people 's. For most of America’s earliest political history each party would print ballots in their own color which made the voters’ choice apparent to all. It wasn’t until progressives pushed for reform that the secret ballot was introduced providing more privacy and safety to voters. Looking at the way politics were run it’s hard to say America was truly living up to its’ ideal of…

    • 1132 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays