37.4 °F
December 03, 2016
River Reporter Facebook pageTRR TwitterRSS Search

Sullivan residents protest Supreme Court decision; is a constitutional amendment against corporate personhood possible?

While he called the Citizens United decision a bad one, he said that there were other decisions that were equally deserving of attention, such as the Garcetti v. Ceballos decision in 2006. In that case, an assistant district attorney, Richard Ceballos, raised objections about “serious misrepresentations” in a warrant. He wrote a memo recommending the related case be dismissed, and claimed that, because of the memo, he was retaliated against. Ceballos said, therefore, his First Amendment right to free speech was violated. But in a five-to-four decision, the Supreme Court ruled that federal employees don’t have a right to free speech if that speech is connected to their employment.
Returning to Citizens United, he said, “It’s a bad decision; however, there’s a huge controversy among progressive legal thinkers about it. A lot of progressive legal thinkers feel that labor unions and corporations, given where we are in American society, should be able to do whatever they want.”

He said he thought a push to amend the Constitution would be a waste of time. But, he said, a similar goal that might be attainable would be campaign reform in New York State, which Governor Andrew Cuomo has said he would pursue.