Citizens United

I am referring to the Citizens United supreme court case.
In 2010, the United States Supreme Court held that freedom of speech prohibits the government from restricting corporate donations (nonprofit and even extended to for-profit).
What is your view on this? Should we get rid of it? Would you refer to corporations as "people"?

This is unprecedented and it is the most savage attack against American democracy, and the concept of one person, one vote that we have seen in our lifetime, and what it is is saying if you are a billionaire, you can buy elections. You can by politicians, and by the way, on the floor of the Senate, on the floor of the House, you can intimidate members, because you will be saying to them if you are going to vote against Wall Street, or the insurance companies, or the military industrial complex, you just do that, and we’re going to have millions of dollars in thirty-second ads in your state this weekend.”

So this whole effort to put huge unprecedented unbelievable amounts of money is the one percent saying look, we’re not content that the top one percent owns forty percent of the wealth. We want more. We want more. We want more, and we’re going to buy the political process to get what we want. So this is the worst assault on the basic democratic traditions which have made our country great that you and I have seen in our lifetimes, and what it means, we have to overturn Citizens United. We have to pass a disclose bill, disclosure legislation next month, which at the very least forces these CEOs to get on television when they do a negative ad, and say I approve this message, and it forces us to know who is contributing.
-Bernie Sanders; Senator, 2012

Bi0Hazard: Freedom of speech is limited by federal government right now in so many ways. For example in the name of defense.

If the court wants to hold the standard that the remainder of the constitution can be protected by limiting speech, Citizens United is wrong. If they do not want to hold that standard, then there can be no restrictions on free speech at all, in any context. Either way the ruling is very inconsistent.

It needs to be overturned.

admin: Would you call corporate donations "free speech"?

Bi0Hazard: It's a form of free speech, yes.

admin: But you think it should be regulated, right?

Bi0Hazard: Totally.