Madison, Wisconsin's lonely wing-nut* David Blaska is weeping o'er the plight of courageous Justice Samuel Alito. Puffs Blaska:
The President crossed the line of propriety in his [SOTU] address last year. And violated the separation of powers.Such a violation occurs when one branch of government unlawfully usurps the power of another. Only the Good Lord knows how Obama's remarks fit that bill in the columnist's roiling right-wing amygdala.
Blaska is defending Citizens United v. FEC, in which a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that corporations are persons, that speech is money, and that the former may "speak" the latter without limit, exactly as the First Amendment has always plainly instructed.
Anyway here's Obama:
Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections. I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities.And here's Justice Stevens:
If taken seriously, [the majority's] assumption that the identity of a speaker has no relevance to the Government's ability to regulate political speech would lead to some remarkable conclusions. ... More pertinently, it would appear to afford the same protection to multinational corporations controlled by foreigners as to individual Americans: To do otherwise, after all, could "enhance the relative voice" of some (i.e., humans) over others (i.e., nonhumans).Follow the logic, is what Stevens is saying. It's the majority's own logic, the Court's own logic where corporations = persons and money = speech. That's where it leads, because the other laws only forbid participation by foreign individuals, not corporations.
And obviously the dissent contains any number of references to reversing a century of law, which Obama was also repeating.
Blaska's is the perfect example of right-wing obsession with Obama gone far beyond either rational or healthy, where simply paraphrasing an opinion of the Court becomes a separation-of-powers violation.
More concerning is Blaska's derangement-of-senses violation.
* Ann Althouse is mainly just an enabler of wing-nuts.