Page 30 - Contribution Limits News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

A candidate for senate if 2012. federal prosecutors say in the indictment that in order to get around election contribution limits had other people give a total of $20,000 to a particular senate campaign. and then he personally reimbursed them for those donations. you are not supposed to do that. the senate candidate in question was not listed in the indictment. according to publicly available data, the only candidate that mr. d' souza donated do was wendy long, giving her the maximum $5,000. she lost that campaign. mr. d' souza's lawyers say he did not act with corrupt or criminal intent what...

Reasoning in doma to apply to similar same-sex marriage bans at the state level. that's what's happening right now. that's what the judge in utah did. a judge in ohio did that as well. this is what we're seeing in federal courts across the country. >> mike sacks, here's a challenge, 15 seconds, a few of the other issues that you see the high court making landmark decisions on? >> church and state, revisiting legislative prayer and how high the wall between church and state will be for sectarian prayers. we also have a case on campaigned finance about aggregate contribution limits. i'm guessing...

You made a candidate say the names of the donors and people that gave them money. wouldn't that allow the market to -- >> disclosure doesn't work with contribution limits. the supreme court recognized that in the 70s. we had a terrific disclosure system with the soft money system. that resulted in all kinds of problems. it was ended by very large votes in congress. you are not going to solve the problem by disclosure. i would be all for requiring disclosure of donors on ads. >> to be continued and good luck with the supreme court decision. i know they will find a way. it is tough. thanks for c...

>> that's absolutely right, melissa. congress has established a system, which requires contribution limits -- contributions to be limited so that government can be protected from corruption and the appearance of corruption. and the problem is that if the court takes the radical step to strike down a federal contribution limit for the very first time, going against their precedent for 40 years, it would increase the impact of the tiniest sliver of the richest americans, these elite donors, over our politics and policy. already americans believe their elected representatives are far more respons...

A professor at harvard, who's been studying systemic discussion, it's in the atlantic, filed by the constitution accountability center saying the framers were concerned not just about individual corruption of individual lawmakers, but the corruption of the legislative process itself as a whole. >> and i have no doubt that jamil, our digital editor, will get his piece up right away, but let me ask, from an aclu perspective, though, because this does get framed as a speech question, does aclu say, i hear you, i hear you on corruption, but krupgcorruption's part of t free speech, we have a right ...