Citizens Divided: Campaign Finance Reform and the Constitution Contributor(s): Post, Robert C. (Author), Karlan, Pamela S. (Contribution by), Lessig, Lawrence (Contribution by) |
|||
ISBN: 0674970934 ISBN-13: 9780674970939 Publisher: Harvard University Press
Binding Type: Paperback Published: October 2016 Click for more in this series: Tanner Lectures on Human Values |
Additional Information |
BISAC Categories: - Law | Constitutional - Law | Legal History - Political Science | American Government - General |
Dewey: 342.730 |
LCCN: 2013040590 |
Series: Tanner Lectures on Human Values |
Physical Information: 0.6" H x 5.8" W x 9" L (0.80 lbs) 264 pages |
Features: Bibliography, Index |
Descriptions, Reviews, Etc. |
Publisher Description: The Supreme Court's 5-4 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which struck down a federal prohibition on independent corporate campaign expenditures, is one of the most controversial opinions in recent memory. Defenders of the First Amendment greeted the ruling with enthusiasm, while advocates of electoral reform recoiled in disbelief. Robert Post offers a new constitutional theory that seeks to reconcile these sharply divided camps. Post interprets constitutional conflict over campaign finance reform as an argument between those who believe self-government requires democratic participation in the formation of public opinion and those who believe that self-government requires a functioning system of representation. The former emphasize the value of free speech, while the latter emphasize the integrity of the electoral process. Each position has deep roots in American constitutional history. Post argues that both positions aim to nurture self-government, which in contemporary life can flourish only if elections are structured to create public confidence that elected officials are attentive to public opinion. Post spells out the many implications of this simple but profound insight. Critiquing the First Amendment reasoning of the Court in Citizens United, he also shows that the Court did not clearly grasp the constitutional dimensions of corporate speech. Blending history, constitutional law, and political theory, Citizens Divided explains how a Supreme Court case of far-reaching consequence might have been decided differently, in a manner that would have preserved both First Amendment rights and electoral integrity. |
Contributor Bio(s): Post, Robert C.: - Robert C. Post is Sol & Lillian Goldman Professor of Law and Dean of Yale Law School. |
Customer ReviewsSubmit your own review |
To tell a friend about this book, you must Sign In First! |