November 27, 2012
October 23, 2012
Product Liability for Faulty Steroid Injections
October 23, 2012
Meningitis Scare with Steroid Injections
October 23, 2012
What is Negligence Per Se?
Corporate Free Speech
Montana Supreme Court Strikes Back at Citizens United
Posted by: Sean Goodbody
March 28, 2012
A little over two years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 130 S. Ct. 876 (2010). You've undoubtedly come across some kind of commentary on Citizens United, or at the very least heard politicians on both sides of the aisle either lambaste it give it their nod of approval. I won't go into great detail as to what the decision says, but KILLIAN DAVIS Richter & Mayle, PC ' own Chris Richter did a great job discussing that opinion and its effect on corporate influence on electoral fundraising, in his blog post in February 2010.
My feelings as to Citizens United align with Chris's. I am troubled by a ruling on the books that equates individuals' First Amendment rights with the right of corporations and other entities' ability to freely spend money to oppose or support certain candidates or proposals. I, like Chris and many others, worry about the long-term effects of a ruling that hands unprecedented spending power to corporations to use to affect the political process. Unchecked spending on campaigns and voter initiatives renders meaningful campaign finance reform virtually impossible.
Why is this ruling important to our clients? While corporations cannot donate directly to political candidates of their choice, corporate entities can now pump big money into opposing candidates or measures they do not like. With this immense spending power, insurance companies and large employers can unofficially throw their full weight behind candidates or referendums that align with their aims: namely trimming back insurance companies' liability, and further knocking down caps on what workers' compensation carriers are required to pay to injured employees. We at KILLIAN DAVIS Richter & Mayle, PC watch these ever-growing limitations affect the rights of our clients and limit their recovery each and every day.
WE THE PEOPLE, OR WE THE CORPORATIONS?
Posted by: Christopher Richter
February 18, 2010
Many are probably wondering what the fuss is about the Supreme Court's recent decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Now this is a lengthy document that I would not expect anyone to read, but it has been provided for your own leisurely reading. For years, this country has been trying to regain elections as the voice of the people, the true citizens of the United States. This one decision has stated that corporations should be treated as citizens, they should have a voice in the political elections. However, at the same time that corporation has all kinds of economic perks and privileges like limited liability, perpetual life, bankruptcy protection and so on, that mean that we're basically subsidizing these entities, and sometimes directly, as we saw with the bailouts, but then they're allowed to turn around and spend money to determine our political future, our political destiny. So it's a very dangerous moment for American political democracy.