Friday, January 29, 2010

Comment on the Belmont Club:
"True ... or not true"

The question of the foreign money raised by Justice Stevens in his dissent was addressed on pages 46-47 of the decision. Minor editing for legibility.

We need not reach the question whether the Govern-

Cite as: 558 U. S. ____ (2010) 47
Opinion of the Court

ment has a compelling interest in preventing foreign individuals or associations from influencing our Nation’s political process. Cf. 2 U. S. C. §441e (contribution and expenditure ban applied to “foreign national[s]”). Section 441b is not limited to corporations or associations that were created in foreign countries or funded predominantly by foreign shareholders. Section 441b therefore would be overbroad even if we assumed, arguendo, that the Government has a compelling interest in limiting foreign influence over our political process. See Broadrick, 413 U. S., at 615.
Now I am not a lawyer. I know who both my parents are. As I read this the question of foreign money is dealt with in another section of the law called §441e and not in the section §441b that was struck down by the Court. Is there a practitioner of the Black Arts who visits the Club who could elucidate?

No comments: