Hacker News Reader

Stopping the treatment of money as speech doesn't ban money, it just means it has to be spent transparently.

Actually that’s exactly what it would do. Citizens United was about the government banning a film because it was illegal campaign spending.

No, banning money would make campaign spending illegal for any reason.

So you’re fine with the government telling you it’s illegal to distribute a movie?

What do my feelings have to do with what the current law says?

Presumably, you’re telling me what you think the law ought to be. As far as the law is currently concerned, spending is protected as speech.

I did mean "used to be", you're right. I was saying that pre Citizens United money was not banned, it was regulated. There is a huge difference.