Bruce Laurie: Confused by Supreme Court campaign contribution ruling
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., right, accompanied by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., speak to reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, April 2, 2014, about the Supreme Court decision in the McCutcheon vs. FEC case, in which the Court struck down limits in federal law on the aggregate campaign contributions individual donors may make to candidates, political parties, and political action committees. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
To the editor:
Regarding the recent Supreme Court political campaign contributions decision, I would appreciate assistance from conservatives and originalists considerate enough to direct me to the clauses in the Constitution that define speech as money and further indicate that the more money in politics, the better.
I thought I had a pretty good grasp of our founding document but appear to have missed the part on speech and money. Also, I was under the impression that judicial activism was a bad thing, sort of like tyranny from unelected public officials, but appear to be confused on that point as well. It seems to be acceptable when invoked in a good cause. Right?