Fetterman, who has long faced criticism from wings of his party for obstructing the Democratic agenda by voting with Republicans, will now have less power ... read more
Montana voters became the first in the nation Tuesday to sign off on an ambitious plan for banishing political dark money, putting the state on a collision course with the landmark Citizens United ruling. The ballot initiative, I-194, which passed with 66% support as of early Wednesday morning, harnesses a novel legal theory in an effort to get around the 2010 US Supreme Court decision that dismantled corporate campaign finance regulation. Its effect would be a statewide backdoor ban on election spending by the businesses, unions, and nonprofits pouring money into the US political system.
Paige Masten: It didn't matter to them that President Donald Trump failed to win 50% of the national popular vote, or that he just barely surpassed that margin in North Carolina. They deemed it a mandate nonetheless ... read more
A federal judge in Oregon says he can no longer assume ICE agents are telling the truth in their arrest paperwork, declaring Monday that live testimony is now "necessary" after finding that warrantless arrests are still being made and facts are being "fabricated in official records" by immigration officers
Gov. Mikie Sherrill sent a letter to 12 port and terminal operators in the state, warning them they "could be subject to millions of dollars in penalties" long after President Trump leaves office. read more


More: Although Montana's measure was the first to reach voters directly, the state is the second overall to try the maneuver " after Hawaii, where the governor signed similar legislation in May. Rather than directly restricting political spending, both versions would remove that power from the state corporate statutes that authorize companies, trade associations, and other "artificial persons" to operate in the first place.
Supporters say the strategy is crafted to avoid clashing with the Citizens United v. FEC ruling, which held that corporate election spending is protected by the First Amendment. But business groups, GOP politicians, and other opponents insist it will crash into the "unconstitutional conditions" doctrine, which prevents states from hinging the exercise of one right on the surrender of another.