@lanalana OH and actually my intuition is that this is a piece in the puzzle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holder_v._Humanitarian_Law_Project …
-
-
En réponse à @sarahjeong
@lanalana so citizens united gives a great deal of leeway to corps in campaign finance in a way that most of america feels uncomfortable w/1 réponse 1 Retweet 1 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
@lanalana but meanwhile, restrictions on hawalla, outcomes like holder v. humanitarian law project (which btw has WEIRD standard of review)2 réponses 1 Retweet 1 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
@lanalana and the most fascinating quasi-state action of recent years re: payment systems-- the wikileaks payment blockade1 réponse 1 Retweet 1 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
@lanalana In all these cases money is absolutely behaving as speech, but issue of free speech barely comes up in discourse let alone law1 réponse 1 Retweet 1 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
@lanalana is it because citizens united is so unpopular? is money as speech something we reject axiomatically as a society?2 réponses 0 Retweet 1 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
@lanalana does the mass effect of these regulations / quasi state actions + citizens united = money is protected speech only within ...1 réponse 0 Retweet 1 j'aime -
@lanalana so that's kind of all i have in my head at the moment re: this issue, it's a really gnarly issue!
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.