So in a recent ruling of the US supreme court, the chief justice wrote (paraphrasing):
- Laws can't limit the amount of money people or corporations can give to politicians and the government can't legislate to limit the ''gratitude'' and ''access'' given by politicians to generous donators
- ''It is not an acceptable governmental objective to level the playing field'' or to equalize the resources of political candidates
Full quotes here from 14:00 along with the complete analysis (CS with Dan Carlin, the guy who does Hardcore History):
To be clear, the decision of the supreme court was targeting a single law that limit the amount you can give to all political candidates in a year but it's by exposing their reasoning for ruling against this law that they wrote the quotes pulled above.
I find this stuff fascinating. How can your perspective be so warped as to declare that politicians giving more gratitude and access to the people that give them the most money is totally fine?
And this is not just one person. A majority (5 to 4) of supreme court judges were in agreement with this reasoning. Mind blowing.