Why Ruth Bader Ginsburg Thinks Citizens United Is the Supreme Court’s Worst Ruling

<a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/wfulawschool/10843641313/in/photolist-hwduLZ-hwc7YL-btfutY-5SP5j6-7AoDrX-oa1r4G-pwoRPY-a7Ttts-hwc6Ss-hwczWb-hwbP6R-hwc8Ym-hwbMuK-hwduBR-hwc8CS-hwbMzV-hwcA19-6ESQd9-LcTUs-pR2WBW-hwcyT9-hwbPx2-hwbN6e-hwbNev-hwdv4x-hwbNvx-hwcyUG-hwczz9-hwdvDv-hwc9em-hwc6WW-hwbPur-hwc7qw-hwdwvF-hwcyLq-hwduQB-isbLNE-eVsjJN-N4R2q-N4ZzT-N4Zya-N4ZFR-N4ZvK-N4QXY-N4QWu-N4ZLn-N4R6m-fWqdqw-hwcyV3-btygP7">Wake Forest University</a>/Flickr

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis, the election, and more, subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.


This story originally appeared at BillMoyers.com.

In an interview with the New Republic, 81-year-old Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said that the current Court’s worst ruling — and the one she would most like to overrule—was Citizens United.

That decision is the one responsible, in large part, for making this midterm election a record breaker in terms of outside spending. And that’s before the really heavy spending comes into play, in the weeks leading up to Election Day.

The 2010 Citizens United v. FEC decision struck down the limits on how much money corporations and unions can spend in federal elections. Ginsburg, who dissented in the case, explains here why Citizens United is top of her list and tackles the two runners-up.

I think the notion that we have all the democracy that money can buy strays so far from what our democracy is supposed to be. So that’s number one on my list. Number two would be the part of the health care decision that concerns the commerce clause. Since 1937, the Court has allowed Congress a very free hand in enacting social and economic legislation. I thought that the attempt of the Court to intrude on Congress’s domain in that area had stopped by the end of the 1930s. Of course health care involves commerce. Perhaps number three would be Shelby County, involving essentially the destruction of the Voting Rights Act. That act had a voluminous legislative history. The bill extending the Voting Rights Act was passed overwhelmingly by both houses, Republicans and Democrats, everyone was on board. The Court’s interference with that decision of the political branches seemed to me out of order. The Court should have respected the legislative judgment. Legislators know much more about elections than the Court does. And the same was true of Citizens United. I think members of the legislature, people who have to run for office, know the connection between money and influence on what laws get passed.

In her wide-ranging interview, she goes on to discuss her concerns for women’s reproductive rights, why she’s not going to step down, despite some calls from the left for her to do so, her scathing dissent on the Hobby Lobby ruling and life as “Notorious R.B.G.”

Read the full interview at The New Republic.

More MotherJones reporting on Dark Money

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest