Top court earned scolding for its groundless ruling

Jim Cassidy, Henderson

Friday, Feb. 5, 2010 | 2:01 a.m.

Regarding Bob Jack’s Jan. 29 letter to the editor, headlined “Obama’s criticism of Supreme Court was inappropriate”:

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision is the most stunning setback to campaign finance reform ever — and not founded by existing law. The court has concluded that any corporation — a nonbreathing, nonvoting financial entity established by either another corporation or a voting bloc of moneyed human beings — has the same standing as a voter.

Every time the Supreme Court comes up with a decision that defies the general population’s logic and goes against our collective best interest, it falls back on “the framers.” But can anybody explain where today’s court members found the framers’ reference to corporations? If not, then this ruling is groundless. In this country, freedom of speech is the right of the citizens. What would the court say about free speech, via financial support, given by corporations owned by foreigners?

When the scholarly, high altitude court comes up with a ruling such as this, the president is the appropriate spokesman on behalf of us. I do not believe his ire is the result of his own self-interest but rather the interest of us all.

Perhaps it is time for an amendment that compels the justices to weigh their analyses of the law against the effects they have on us as a whole.