How California can neuter "Citizens United".

[applegrove]

This could turn the tide against big money in politics. Read this. It is long and a little boring but it just might SAVE DEMOCRACY!!! If you read nothing else today READ THIS. open.substack.com/pub/robertre...

— Rhinovian (@rhinovian.bsky.social) 2026-03-01T21:47:48.760Z

[in2herbs]

1. I was following the MT attempt but quit after a court ruled that it discriminated against

corporations' rights, since corporations are people, too!

Can't remember whether it was MT Supreme Court, a Circuit Court, or the USSC or what the status of the MT attempt is at the present time.

But I am wholly in favor of the idea!!!

[pecosbob]

2. I've been thinking about this since I first heard about the Montana corporate definitions.

States have the power to regulate the very existence of corporations...what they are and what they can and can't do. Prove me wrong.

[Fiendish Thingy]

3. I can't prove you wrong

But I’m sure there is a judge somewhere who would happily say “hold my beer…”.

[onenote]

4. Citizens United is a 501(c ) ( 4) non-profit corporation. So is MoveOn.org.

Does that mean that if California passes the legislation described, MoveOn.Org wouldn't be able to engage in advocacy in California?

I think Citizens United was very wrongly decided. But I have my doubts about the distinction between rights and powers underlying this theory. Does it mean a state could modify its corporate law to bar a non-profit corporation from spending money in support of immigration reform or or Democratic candidates? So long as the First Amendment applies to corporations, I don't know that a state can circumvent it by barring corporations from speaking, whether its through buying ads or otherwise.

[applegrove]

5. Some have hope. I doubt the corporations or moveon would be unable to do business

in California. They just wouldn't be able to donate to candidates.

[onenote]

6. What would MoveOn do in California?

The proposed California statute would bar it from engaging in "election activity or ballot issue activity" Those terms are defined as follows:
“Ballot issue activity” means paying or contributing in order to directly or indirectly aid, promote, or prevent the passage of a ballot question or initiative.
“Election activity” means paying or contributing in order to directly or indirectly aid, promote, or prevent the nomination or election of any person, or to directly or indirectly aid or promote the interests, success, or defeat of any political party or organization."

That's a much broader ban than just preventing donations to candidates.