Obama v. the First Amendment — VOICES for REASON

Last week’s Supreme Court ruling, which struck down restrictions on certain kinds of political speech by corporations, was a profoundly important decision. Not only did it eliminate the most odious parts of McCain-Feingold, but it did so largely for the right reasons. In particular, the Court recognized that a corporation is an association of individuals, who retain their First Amendment right to free speech. I highly recommend reading the decision in its entirety.

The decision couldn’t have been more timely. The purpose of the First Amendment is to protect our ability to communicate our views without interference by the government. Politically, it is, as James Madison called it, “the only effectual guardian of every other right.” By enabling us to freely criticize our leaders, it is the best and last defense against the threat of unlimited government power.

As this blog has argued at length, Obama has been making an alarming grab for power since the day he entered office. He has shown nothing but contempt for economic freedom and limited government–and now he is seeking to silence those, corporations in particular, who challenge him.

In a statement released the day of the decision, Obama complained: “It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans.”

Obama was condemning “powerful interests,” while claiming for himself and his colleagues the awesome power to decide who can speak during an election. In Obama’s universe, he should be free to use his unmatched megaphone to push his agenda, but corporate executives and shareholders should not have the right to speak out in opposition to it.

In our universe, however, the President’s job is not to bully Americans and American corporations. His job is to protect our rights by executing the nation’s laws and upholding the Constitution. And it is the job of the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution. That makes Obama’s response to the Court’s decision all the more disturbing.

According to Obama’s State of the Union address: “With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests. . . . I’d urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems.” If that weren’t clear enough, Vice President Biden said of the Court’s ruling, it “was dead wrong and we have to correct it.”

This is brazen defiance of the rule of law. The President and Congress do not get to “correct” the Court’s interpretation of the Constitution. They do not have the power to pass laws the Court has found violate the First Amendment rights of Americans. Someone should tell the President that saying “with all due deference to separation of powers” does not by itself constitute due deference to separation of powers.

Now, more than ever, we need to protect our right to speak out against government power. Thankfully, the Supreme Court made a significant step toward securing that right.