It is imperative to mention that the courts have chosen to stick to the ban imposed on contribution of unlimited funds to political campaigns. It is certain that about 90% of Americans want the role of money in politics to be checked. This is what has made so many people to eagerly wait for the ruling so as to know what role the corporates will take in financing politics in future. The decision by the Supreme Court will certainly not be welcome for all. They refused to lift the ban on this political campaign finance law. As you read more, you will learn more about this decision made by the courts.
It is important for us to start with understanding that nothing new took place in the court. The Supreme Court just chose to go by what the previous ruling on the campaign finance laws was without considering its challenges. As such, no corporate will be free to donate their money to campaigns or even candidates. This decision has resulted in curtailing the ballooning role of corporates in the political field. It was barely uncommon for these corporates to donate to political campaigns every now and then right then. This would often be allowed if the money is not tied to a particular individual. You will learn that this case was brought to court by two companies from Massachusetts. this case was aimed at improving the sense of financial responsibilities as well as economic opportunities. It will actually be more prudent for you to consider a good lawyer in case of such a big case.
It is also important for you to understand the legal argument behind this particular case. You will note that these companies intimated that the first amendment rights of companies was being overlooked. They argued that freedom of speech will time and again be compromised by these political donations. They also invoked the constitution that is pillared on equally protecting each individual. You will find that non-profit as well as charity organizations are barely given the room to donate to these political campaigns. This goes ahead to show that the treatment offered right here tend to be discriminatory. This is seen to be against the pillars of the constitution.
It is imperative to mention that what the high court ruled was still favored. This ruling claimed that corporates are not allowed to donate money to political campaigns. This is due to the fact that they can spiral to corruption in politics. This means that all political candidates will be forbidden from accepting such donations from various corporations.