There is actually a need to point out that the courts have opted to maintain the ban on corporations extending donations to political campaigns. There is a good number of Americans whose interest is to see the part played by money in politics being put under control. It is for this reason that a good number of people have been patiently waiting for this ruling to see if corporates will be given the room to donate in future. It is evident that not all will appreciate the decision that the Supreme Court has chosen to go for. They declined to overturn the ban on campaign finance. You will get to understand more about this particular ruling as you keep on reading.
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 witness that this case was actually brought about by two companies that come from Massachusetts. this case was aimed at improving the sense of financial responsibilities as well as economic opportunities. It is recommended for you to consider a good lawyer whenever presenting such a case.
Seek to ensure that you are familiarized with the legal argument in this case. You will find that these companies argued that the first amendment rights of companies was barely being observed. 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. While at it, non-profit and even charity organizations are not allowed to donate to these campaigns. This goes ahead to show that the treatment offered right here tend to be discriminatory. This does conflict what the constitution basically stands for.
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 because it could easily lead to corruption in politics. It is for this reason that no political candidate will be at liberty to receive any donation from corporations.