possibly the worst Supreme Court decision ever handed down - and there are a whole shitload of awful SC decisions - strictly b/c it was immediately apparent to anyone with two brain cells to rub together how it would enable and entrench corruption and influence in American politics
this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2026
258 points (100.0% liked)
politics
30789 readers
2845 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
possibly the worst Supreme Court decision ever handed down
Perhaps, but you're going up against the classics. Dred Scott. Plessy v. Ferguson. Korematsu.
Also, Citizens United was only the latest in a long series of bad decisions that gradually elevated sociopathic artificial entities over natural persons.
- Dartmouth College v Woodward
- Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad
- Dodge v Ford Motor Co.
etc.
decisions that gradually elevated sociopathic artificial entities over natural persons.
Yeesh. Not sure if I'm just naive for not really putting 2+2 together before reading your comment, or overly paranoid about how dystopian scifi the future might get from here?
But I never really thought about the laws that were used to elevate corporations over natural persons possibly foreshadowing a future that's controlled by something that's somehow even more ominous and artificial that these corporations are currently racing to create.
I have to say in 2026 I'm leaning more towards me just being naive because corporations are themselves a byproduct of a society obsessed with using technique as a means to achieve the most efficient end.
And at this point, I'm also pretty sure that while most rational humans hear alarm bells and see clear premonitions of dystopia when they hear a question like "What could possibly be more efficient than a world where all human imperfections have ceased to exist?," the sociopaths running these corporations believe they're ushering in paradise like priest Crystal.
Let's turn that could be into an is
Turn them into was/were.
I’ll believe it when I see it
yeah it is the absolutely biggest improvement that could be made (outside of ousting the current administration) but I can't see it being done currently.
Citizens United will be remembered as that one time John Roberts accidentally destroyed the United States because of his hubris. A really cool dude, that John Roberts.
It wasn't an accident. There's a great podcast called 5-4 that has gone through some of the worst decisions in history. They talked about Citizens United, and how Roberts had to stretch the truth to come to that decision. He's done that a lot, he does the Roberts two-step, when he first upholds a law that he doesn't like, but makes up some shit about how there are "questions" about it, and then his allies in the broader Conservative movement then bring a lawsuit that specifically targets one of those "questions" so that Roberts can overturn the law.
Thomas does something similar, except it's even more egregious, he will write an unhinged dissent or concurrence that makes bonkers legal arguments that may or may not be fully related to the case at hand, and then when he's up to write for the majority, he'll cite his own arguments in those dissents and concurrences. Those documents have zero legal weight, but he cites them as if they were settled law.
It's crazy to me that there isn't some kind of scientific review process when they write these things up. Formal logic has been worked out for centuries and you can just look at the math to confirm what they're saying makes any sense at all.
It wouldn't solve all problems but some of these recent rulings are so divorced from reality that they've left logic in the dust.
Actually, one of the many times John Roberts ~~accidentally~~ purposely destroyed the United States because of his hubris.
The best argument for time travel is our ancestors somehow already knew a toilet should be called "the John."
With this Supreme Court?
I was gonna say Clarence Thomas is building a larger garage for all the RVs he’s getting to proclaim Citizens is here to stay.
They'll probably replace it with something even worse
It would be a massive win for all of us peons just trying to survive while our gov actively tries to kill us.
You can’t end citizens united without first overturning Buckley v Valeo
If we do this, please don’t half ass it.
No politician would ever vote against getting unlimited and legal slush funds
A couple would.
But yes not most
Pitchforks & Molotov coctails can be very motivating to representatives
Liberty comes at the end of a gun.
They'll never give it to you. You have to take it.
Is someone handing out drugs? There is no way that is happening. Not without massive legislation and likely some convictions.
Your scenario is rather optimistic, honestly.
Doesn’t it, though.
Im gonna call this now.
If on some chance the supreme court strikes down SpeechNow because of this, they'll somehow stay it until after the next general election as its "too soon" and "too hard" to change it now.
Too late, hope it was worth it fuckers
I think it's too late. The damage worldwide is irreversible.
Yes! Holy shit if we could see citizens United overturned it would be fucking huge. Like a reverse of thinking they would never see Roe v. Wade overturned in their lifetime.
This always seemed like such a distant dream, and not like it being overturned would just magically undo all the other evil shit Citizens United has helped accomplish, but it definitely would be a very big step towards restoring and improving democracy.
Shit we occupied nearly every city in the country demanding this, and we couldn't get it then
So I have mixed feelings.
So obviously it's a bad thing. But. Because it's now legal to bribe. We know who is getting bribed easily.
Once it becomes illegal again it's going to be harder to know who is getting bribed.
If only it were legal, bank robbers wouldn’t have to wear masks. Then we would know who’s doing it.
I think I have been misunderstood. I should have said. The silver lining is now we see clearly how many politicians are sellouts. And we know their names.
I definitely think Citizens United was one of the worst things that happened to this country.
I only remark that now we know something we didn't know before. We suspected. But now we literally have receipts.
I worded my first comment poorly.