Op-Ed: The McCain-Feingold Act May Doom Itself

A provision in the campaign-reform law could spur the Supreme Court to hear a challenge.

, The National Law Journal

   | 1 Comments

A provision in the campaign-reform law could spur the Supreme Court to hear a challenge.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • Pancho

    It‘s no surprise that Scalia, Kennedy and Thomas would resent being precluded from having the opportunity to dismantle the remainder of McCain-Feingold.Scalia and Thomas have met in secret with the Koch brothers. Anyone with any sense would realize that the Kochs probably had veto power over the executive nominations of Roberts and Alito. After all, Bush v. Gore, in a 5-4 decision thanks to the despicable votes of two members appointed by the Republican nominee‘s father, gave corporatists control of the White House in the fraudulent vote count (enabled by the illegal voter purging of 50,000 heavily minority Florida voters just prior to the 2000 election) that forced the apparent loser in that state‘s count to be installed as president.Kennedy, whose vote was critical in that decision, wrote rather astonishingly, in Citizens United, “We now conclude that independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption.”Only a moron or a liar could come to that conclusion.I cherish to this day the opinions of Justice Stevens in both of those cases. If only there had been one more honest Justice on the court when they were heard, we might not have had the Patriot Act, the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq, and the 2008 meltdown of the economy.I sat in the Senate gallery, watching as McCain and Feingold, joined by Wellstone and Boxer, walked desk to desk and lobbied their colleagues on the floor for passage of the bill. I thought it was a new day in America, Instead it has led to a state of affairs that would have given Teddy Roosevelt a stroke.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202734808860

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.