But the word has different meanings in the two spheres. The “corruption” Kennedy wrote of in CU was actual or apparent quid pro quo corruption, per Buckley and it’s progeny.
Guess I was trying to make a somewhat different point.
What Justice Kennedy (and the SCOTUS majority) thinks is not corruption is considered by House ethics rules to be core corruption. cc: @asmith83https://twitter.com/BrianSvoboda/status/988960351696891904 …
-
-
-
no, that's only because J. Kennedy read Buckley unduly narrowly. Compare the reading of J. Souter in Shrink Missouri.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.