Transcription
The state of Montana has come up with the most creative and perhaps the most effective way from essentially overturning Citizens United. It's a ballot initiative that is collecting signatures right now. Opponents of the bill, it's called the Transparency Election Act, tried to stop it in court, but the Montana Supreme Court just ruled that they can continue to collect signatures. If passed, this would bar any corporation doing business in Montana from donating to political campaigns. My name is Dena Dah with the Minus Touch Network. Let's get into this.
Now, as we know, the Citizens United case Supreme Court ruled that corporations have a First Amendment right to donate to campaigns. And this very novel approach to effectively barring corporations from donating to political campaigns does not require that Chief Justice Roberts change his mind because as we know that's not going to happen anytime soon. No, instead it looks at the law and specifically what Citizens United has said compared to other Supreme Court precedents. And it's an approach that could work not just in Montana, but across the country. But let's first look at Robert Ree, who just highlighted this in a video and spoke about how unpopular Citizens United is. The fact that this initiative is even coming from the deep red state of Montana is very revealing. Take a listen.
"State by state, this would effectively neuter Citizens United, which by the way is enormously unpopular. 75% of Americans disapprove of it. And it's no wonder why. It has allowed corporations and the billionaires that control them to hijack our elections and distort our democracy while drowning out your voice. But this plan out of Montana will go a long way to putting power back where it belongs, in the hands of the people. I urge Montana to pass this referendum denying corporations the power to spend in politics and hope your state will follow Montana's lead. Please share this video to help spread the word."
Interestingly, Montana actually had a law as far back as 1912 barring political donations, corporate political donations, but Citizens United overturned that. Now this law if passed what it does and why it could withstand this current MAGA Supreme Court is instead of restricting its rights, its speech rights as Citizens United said they cannot be done. It instead targets the powers.
Now, Supreme Court president has ruled several times starting from the late 1800s that any rights a corporation has comes from the states itself. That the corporations are artificial beings and they are basically constructed under the state law. The state grants corporations power to buy other companies to issue stock. Without state law, it essentially couldn't come into existence. The powers come from the state. And so this Montana initiative basically is not giving the corporation the power to donate to political campaigns. And that's why it can square within the current Supreme Court law. It's not treating it differently. It's saying that the creation of it doesn't come with this particular power.
And the California Americans for Progress issued this very long paper laying out the legal arguments and justifications for this specifically talking about prior Supreme Court precedents. The Supreme Court ruled in 1819 that corporations were artificial beings. And then again in 1869 in a case of Paul versus Virginia, it ruled that corporations were not citizens. Instead, they are quote creatures of local law and have not even an absolute right of recognition in other states, but depend for that and for the enforcement of their contracts upon the ascent of those states, which may be given accordingly on such terms as they please. In fact, the Hobby Lobby case, Justice Samuel Alo ruled the same thing. Now, Hobby Lobby, if you remember, was about whether or not a closely held company had to provide funds for contraceptive. And the court ruled not. And the Samuel Alo specifically says, quote, the objectives that may properly be pursued by the companies in these cases are governed by the laws of the state in which they are incorporated.
Now, let's talk about incorporation. This is what I did when I practice law as a corporate lawyer. Pretty much almost not all but most of our companies in the United States are incorporated in Delaware. Delaware has a case law because there's been so much incorporation there. For one, it's considered a very friendly business business state and the case law is so vigorous that companies know if they are incorporated there what to expect under the law because there's so much precedent about corporate law in Delaware. So most companies in the United States are incorporated in Delaware. So you might ask, how is this Montana law going to even help?
Well, as I was just quoting the Supreme Court there, just because a corporation is incorporated in Delaware, doesn't mean that they also don't have to follow the laws in which they do business. And that's the thing. California is known to have perhaps the most stringent business code that exists. And a corporation that doesn't do business in California doesn't have to follow that. But if you spend if you earn a certain amount of money from transactions in California, it's not that much. I think it's like $700,000 or 25% of your business comes from your business in California. Then you have to follow the business code of California in addition to wherever you're incorporated. So let's say you're incorporated in Delaware, you have to follow the Delaware Code and the California code. And of course, the California code is much stringent. You can't avoid it though if you're doing that much business in California. And let's be frank, the corporations that are donating money to the political campaigns are certainly doing that amount of business in California just because of the sheer size of California. And the same goes for Montana. So if a corporation is doing a certain amount of business in Montana, even if they're incorporated elsewhere, they have to follow the business code. And if that business code of Montana says that a corporation cannot that does business in Montana does not have the power to contribute to political campaigns, then state law in Montana restricts them from donating in Montana.
So this Montana law, if it goes on the ballot and if it passes, could be a framework for every other state to do because, as we know, this is deeply unpopular. Specifically in California, California state legislatures want to amend their state legislature. It doesn't even have to go to a vote of the people. California, of course, the state legislature, as we know, is a majority Democrat and they usually are always able to get their Democratic policies out there. So calling out those California state legislators to take a look at what Montana is doing here and revise their business code to say that any corporation doing business in California cannot donate to any California political campaigns. And this isn't just limited to state races. It's any political campaigns in California. And this could be a framework to do across the states either by state legislature if there's enough willpower or by voter initiative as the steep red state in Montana is trying to do.
Take another listen about Robert Rich. He was uh who is the former secretary of labor under Clinton. He also worked under Ford Carter. A renowned economist breaking it down.
"Organizers in Montana have drafted a ballot referendum for voters to consider in 2026 that would no longer give corporations the power to spend on Montana's ballot issues or in its local, state, and even federal elections. The best part, it would not require the Supreme Court to overturn its Citizens United ruling which said the government cannot put any limits on independent political spending by corporations. Nor would this plan require an amendment to the US Constitution, which would likely take years, if ever. If this referendum passes in deep red Montana, it could easily spread to other states, including yours."
My favorite thing to do after long days is sit on a couch and pull out a blanket. I am a blanket person, and Lola blankets are by far my favorite blankets. In fact, they're the favorite of my entire family. So, I've had to get more than one. And perhaps the best thing about it is that they still look and feel great despite the fact that I have to wash it many times with the pets and the kids. I used to go through blankets fairly quickly cuz they just never looked or felt very good after multiple washes. The thing that is great about Lola blankets is that it is doublehemmed for durability. So, it doesn't peel or shed even after so many washes. And it's crafted with ultra soft luxury faux fur and a signature four-way stretch that sets it apart. It has 20,000 five-star reviews. And once you feel it, you'll know why. It is called the world's number one blanket. This thing is next level. And perhaps another great thing that I love about it is the fact that they donate a portion of their proceeds to breast cancer research. And they even have a blanket for brave program where they give blankets to people going through treatment. I have the large. It is perfect for cozing up solo or someone else. But they even have an extra large which is massive. Plus they have weighted blankets for calming vibes and matching pillows. And right now for a limited time our listeners can get 40% off select Lola blankets products with code mistrial at checkout. Just head to lolabankets.com and use code mistrial to get 40% off your order. After you purchase, they'll ask where you heard about them. Please support our show and let them know we sent you. Wrap yourself in luxury with Lola blankets.
This is by far the most hopeful I've been about an avenue to essentially overturn Citizens United. This is what we do with an outof control Supreme Court is we make other parts of our government more powerful including states because if there's a will of the people we can change state law and for the Supreme Court to decide that somehow Montana doesn't have the right to decide what kind of powers a corporation who has to register to do business in the state of Montana. I mean that would be overturning not only 200 years of precedent but basic business practice as it is corporation has to register to do business in whatever state they want to do business and comply with that law. It would be unprecedented and chaotic for business laws to go that far. So really excited to see what this looks like. If you're in Montana, look out for that petition to sign it to try to get that on the ballot. And if you're in the rest of the states, maybe this is a time to push your legislators to come up with something similar. If you haven't subscribed to the Midas Touch podcast, be sure to do that. Check out the Miss Trial podcast wherever you listen to podcast and check out our sponsors in the description below. So grateful for our sponsors. They do not censor what I have to say in this really insane time that we are living in. and ending on a hopeful note to perhaps get money out of politics with this new Montana initiative.
Love this video? Support independent media and unlock exclusive content. Add free videos and custom emojis by becoming a paid member of our YouTube channel today. You can also gift memberships to others. Let's keep growing together.