[ad_1]
The High Court, in an unsigned order, refused to consider challenging a Massachusetts law prohibiting for-profit corporations from donating to political campaigns. In doing so, the judges upheld one of the pillars of the campaign finance law and rejected the opportunity to dramatically expand the Court's blockade in Citizens United in 2010, which allowed companies to spend unlimited amounts in elections, as long as these expenses remained independent of expenditures. candidates.
This decision, along with the decision of a separate appellate court later that year, contributed to the creation of free super PACs.
The Massachusetts case was brought by two companies, 1A Auto Inc. and 126 Self Storage Inc., who argued that the state's prohibition of for-profit corporate donations to candidates and political committees violated the rights to freedom of the constitutional guarantee of equal protection provided for by law.
The companies argued that the state imposes tougher restrictions on for-profit companies than on non-profit corporations and unions. Last year, the highest court in Massachusetts upheld the state's ban on corporate contributions to political campaigns, claiming that it served to prevent corruption.
Business owners are active in the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, a group promoting "fiscal responsibility" and "increasing economic opportunities" in the state, according to its website. They were represented in their appeal by the libertarian Goldwater Institute.
[ad_2]
Source link