Adam Schiff and a group of Democrats introduced a proposed constitutional amendment to overturn the Citizens United decision, one of the greatest free-speech victories in history.
It’s just a political stunt, of course, as Schiff doesn’t have the votes. But the stunt reflects the authoritarian outlook that’s been normalized on the contemporary left. From the day the decision came down, 13 years ago this week, Citizens United was a rallying cry for those threatened by unregulated speech. President Barack Obama infamously, and inaccurately, rebuked the justices during his State of the Union for upholding the First Amendment. Since then, Democrats have regularly blamed the decision for the alleged corrosion of “democracy.”
Democrats try to obscure the fact that their position is objectively pro-censorship. Recall that Citizens United revolved around the federal government’s banning the showing of a documentary critical of 2008 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton before the Democratic primary elections. At the time, McCain-Feingold made it illegal for corporations (groups of freely associating citizens) and unions (ditto) to engage in “electioneering” a month before a primary or two months before a general election. In oral arguments, then-Solicitor General of the United States, now-Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan initially contended that the federal government had the right to ban books that “express advocacy.”
Also recall that “campaign finance” laws — speech codes — were written by politicians and defended by political media who were encumbered by any limitations on their own free expression. These detestable laws banned groups of citizens from assembling and
