SCOTUS and whatnot

[Tigeraholic1]

13 hours ago, buddha said:

None of the liberal justices publicly  dissented.

 

[Tigeraholic1]

 

 

[romad1]

Post by @mirrorpond.bsky.social — Bluesky

 

Trick🌊

 

‪@mirrorpond.bsky.social‬

Follow

SCOTUS: Student Loan forgiveness illegal ! Bad Biden!

SCOTUS is fine with Slush funds paid by the US government for those storming the Capitol and convicted.

[buddha]

3 hours ago, romad1 said:

Post by @mirrorpond.bsky.social — Bluesky

 

Trick🌊

 

‪@mirrorpond.bsky.social‬

 

Follow

SCOTUS: Student Loan forgiveness illegal ! Bad Biden!

SCOTUS is fine with Slush funds paid by the US government for those storming the Capitol and convicted.

were they asked to rule on trump's slush fund?

honest question, did i miss it?

[CMRivdogs]

Interesting move...

 

Quote

On May 14, 2026, Governor Josh Green signed Senate Bill 2471 into law. Now called Act 011, the law states that corporations and other artificial entities created under Hawaii’s state laws do NOT have the power to spend money or contribute anything of value to influence elections or ballot measures. Instead, these business entities possess only the powers that are “necessary or convenient to carry out their lawful business or organizational purposes.”

This law is an in-your-face challenge to the post-Citizens United world where corporations have been playing God with our elections. What Hawaii basically said was: Corporations are NOT people, and we’re not letting them hijack our democracy anymore.

But, Act 011 flips the script: it doesn’t try to regulate speech. Instead, it goes to the systemic root of the issue: because corporations are artificial “persons” created by the state, if the state charters them then the state gets to define exactly what powers those artificial “persons” get to have. This law is powerful in how straightforward it is. It reaffirms that corporations, LLCs, partnerships, nonprofits — basically any artificial entity formed under the laws of the state of Hawaii — only have the powers “necessary or convenient” for their legitimate business purposes. Influencing elections, funding ballot measures, bankrolling candidates or PACs? Definitely NOT on the list of “necessary or convenient business purposes.”

More in the link. But the law includes all businesses in Hawaii, but includes out of state companies as well. It doesn't restrict free speech

Then this,,,

Quote

What is really impressive is that even in Hawaii’s heavily Democratic legislature, SB 2471 passed with strong Republican backing, too. In fact, the votes were unanimous in the Senate and near-unanimous in the House. Why? Because legislators from both sides of the aisle recognized the problem of unchecked corporate influence.

 

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, CMRivdogs said:

Interesting move...

 

More in the link. But the law includes all businesses in Hawaii, but includes out of state companies as well. It doesn't restrict free speech

Then this,,,

 

Montana is doing something like this also. Corporations operate under state law. A state can decide what kind of corporate structure and purpose they allow. I'm sure there will be some kind of challenge under the ICC eventually but we'll see.

The flaw in Citizens United has always been the fallacy that sits at its heart, which is that the 'corporation' has some kind of independent existence and thus some kind of standing under the constituion. They do not, they are 100% the creation of statute law, and thus what they may and may not do under terms of incorporation must be subject to statute law under any consistent logic. State legislatures could decide tomorrow that every current corporation in America ceases to exist and then recreate corporate existence on a different set of operating principles.

Edited 43 minutes ago by gehringer_2