Et tu, ACLU?
It’s not the same as defending the Klan
This decision has transformed the ACLU into a conservative political organization, working to arm the ultimate enemies of democracy with unlimited monetary and political power.
By Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman / The Rag Blog / January 27, 2010
The Supreme Court’s atrocious Citizen’s United green light for unlimited corporate campaign spending had a willing accomplice — the American Civil Liberties Union.
As long-time supporters, we are horrified by the ACLU’s betrayal of political reality and plain common sense.
Standing proudly with the victorious corporate hacks on the steps of the SCOTUS was none other than the legendary First Amendment crusader Floyd Abrams.
Keith Olbermann has called him a “Quisling” for aiding and abetting this catastrophic confirmation of corporate “personhood.”
The ACLU has long been the go-to stalwart of First Amendment rights. Its list of accomplishments is long, impressive and essential.
The ACLU has bravely faced divisive, expensive controversy. Long ago it defended the right of American neo-nazis to march through Skokie, a heavily Jewish suburb of Chicago.
The ACLU has also defended the right of such loathsome haters as the Ku Klux Klan to gather and speak.
In these and other such cases, the ACLU has been right, and has courageously paid a price.
But perhaps the organization has confused those valid First Amendment cases with a Citizen’s United decision perpetrated by the most virulent judicial opponents of individual speech in the history of the Court. In reference to this case the ACLU says it “has consistently taken the position that section 203 is facially unconstitutional under the First Amendment because it permits the suppression of core political speech, and our amicus brief takes that position again.”
We respectfully — but vehemently — disagree. Simply put: money is not speech, corporations are not people.
Given the immense sums of cash these corporations have to spend, the Citizen’s United decision is the equivalent not of guaranteeing individual Nazis the freedom to march, but instead of granting the Party itself the right to drive tanks down the street, guns ablazing.
It’s not the same as giving individual Klan members the right to hold a rally, but rather for the organization to do public lynchings as part of a terror campaign aimed at taking tangible power.
Nowhere in the Constitution do the Founders mention the word corporation. There were six of them at the time of ratification, all strictly limited by state charter to where and what kind of business they could do. They bear scant resemblance to the multi-national behemoths we confront today. Those who wrote and ratified the First Amendment would be horrified by their very existence.
The moneyed power of these corporations and their access to the First Amendment through the myth of “personhood” has been the ultimate pox on American politics since the 1880s.
It has been reported that the ACLU Board is now considering endorsing limits on campaign spending. Abrams has been reported as arguing that “The worst thing you could do — the absolutely worst thing you could do — is transform a civil liberties organization into a liberal political organization.”
But this decision has transformed the ACLU into a conservative political organization, working to arm the ultimate enemies of democracy with unlimited monetary and political power.
We are confident the activist community can survive this latest assault on democracy. It will not be easy, but it can be done.
A good first step would be for the ACLU to face reality and now oppose the false claims anti-human money machines have made on our sacred Bill of Rights.
[Attorney Bob Fitrakis and historian Harvey Wasserman have co-authored four books on election protection. Bob’s “Fitrakis Files” are at www.freepress.org, where this article also appears. Harvey’s History of the United Sates is at www.harveywasserman.com.]
In my opinion the Citizens United decision is a big favor from the Supreme Court to the Progressive movement because it brings the issue of corporate dominance of society to the forefront, where it can’t be ignored. Shortly it will become evident to everyone who is sentient how this country is really run.
Progressives will now have an issue to hammer away on that will resonate with the populace.
I believe there are many corporate CEOs who wish this decision was never made as it will put them in the postion of having to make political enemies, something they would rather not to do. It is so much cleaner working behind the scenes.
Gareth, for some weird reason I feel optimistic today so am inclined to agree with you. It’s going to be awfully messy for awhile though and of course that means the economically- disadvantaged will have it tougher still and meanwhile I am one of these. I tend to think highly of ACLU so wonder if they’re not being adaptive while attempting a new strategy. Maybe they see this as one last chance for all of us to see what our Constitution should stand for. But then, who knows, I could just be speaking as one nearly driven crazy by what to me seems too much insanity.
Jane Van Praag