the end, you re the president s choice and if i find you qualified, you re on? reporter: not yet. i m going to listen to lindsey graham because he was the only republican who voted for the president s first nominee, sotomayor. the only republican on this committee. other republicans on this committee have taken that approach in the past, namely, orrin hatch. that has very much been his philosophy and approach in the past but last time nor sotomayor he noted no and he s giving no signals he s going to vote for elena kagan even though he has been more open minded to democratic nominees in the past. dana, say with us. we re not expecting much in terms of candor. the nominees are very wearful but she expressed her views on the military policy of don t ask, don t tell. she is on the record as the dean
of speech also applied to small s chapter corporations that might only have one shareholder. there are more 4.5 million s chapter corporations in america. we have 56,000 in my home state of utah alone. these are small companies who want the legal protections that incorporating provides. these are family farmers. these are ranchers, mom and pop stores and other small businesses. before the citizens united decision, these small family businesses could be barred from using their regular budget for, say, a radio program or a family flet pope posing their congressman for a vote on a bill if it was that close to an election. do you believe the constitution gives the federal government this much power? senator hatch, congress determined that corporations and trade unions generally had this kind of corrupt impact i m talk being about the 4.5
the court rejected that because of what you started with. you said that political speech is a paramount first amendment value. that s no doubt the case, and the court applied a compelling interest standard and the court rejected the position, but the position that we took was to defend the statute which applied broadly. i have no problem with that because that was your job, but i m getting into some of the comments by some of our colleagues, the president and others about how wrong this case was. when i don t think it was wrong at all. you re 1996 law review article about private speech and public purpose emphasized the need to examine the motive behind speech restrikdss. since you have already written about this, i would like to know whether you personally agree with the supreme court and citizens united decision that quote speech restrictions you are listening to orrin
this is not including another 1278 pages of justifications for these regulations nor another 1771 election commission advisory opinions even more enforcement rules and more federal statutes. let me ask you this, do you believe that the constitution allows the federal government to require groups such as nonprofit corporations and small s chapter corporations to comb through all of this? this is just part of it? there are thousands of other pages of regulations, likely hire an election attorney and form a political action committee to express a opinion on the radio or family flet or movie to criticize their elected officials? do you believe that the constitution allows that type of requirement? well, senator hatch, i want