Who is McCutcheon, and how is his case different from Citizens United? Why might some people freak out? Why might some people be happy?
Shaun McCutcheon is a professional engineer in the state of Alabama who owns a company that promotes clean coal and solutions for alternate energies (Infomedia, 2012). He has been a proponent of helping to elect Republican candidates who are “true conservatives” and has been known for donating heavily to the Republican party since at least 15 years (Infomedia, 2012). “Mr. McCutcheon had the charming patriotic habit of making his checks payable in the amount of $1776” (Baran, 2014). McCutcheon was also the plaintiff in the landmark supreme court case, Shaun McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, 572 U.S. 185 (2014). The decision “…removed the aggregate limits on donations to federal candidates, parties and political action committees (PACs) during an election cycle” (Kelly, 2021). This case and ruling was different from the Citizens United case in that McCutcheon’s case dictated how individuals could donate to political parties, individuals and groups whereas the Citizens United case was arguing how much “…corporations or labor unions could donate to political campaigns” (Legal Information Institute, 2010).Criminal homework help
Some people may freak out because this indicates that wealthy individuals may be able to “buy” their candidate into office thereby getting their own political views put into action by using their own money. The typical American family could never be able to contribute as much as wealthy individuals and that is a scary concept to think about, especially because the average American family’s income is around $70,000 USD. I think on the surface this looks sketchy, but after realizing that true political campaigns use millions and millions of dollars for their particular campaigns, this is pretty par for the course. In McCutcheon’s case, he was only donating that $1,776 USD to specific candidates and I think that is more of just a move of saying “hey, I support you” rather than swaying a particular election. Some people may be happy about this decision as well. I think this particular group of happy people refers to the uber wealthy who contribute to political campaigns on the regular, and that is to be expected. At the end of the day, I am just glad the courts still uphold the integrity of our constitutions when making these judgements on cases that challenge first amendment rights.Criminal homework help
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER NOW
McCutcheon is a wealthy business man who happens to own a clean coal company. He is interested in donating money to various Republican candidates and organizations. The Supreme Court ruled in the McCutcheon v. FEC case to strike down limits on campaign finance. Apparently, no individual was allowed to give more than $48,600 in any election cycle in terms of handing it over to the candidates themselves (Prokop, 2015). There is a cap of $74,600 each year on contributions to all federal PACs in which the courts decided that these caps were unconstitutional (Prokop, 2015). McCutcheon wants to expand the amount of money he can donate to a campaign as he argues that the cap violates his right to freedom of speech. This case is different from Citizens United because they focus on donating to Super PAC’s which can not directly deal with political candidates. However, McCutcheon donates directly to individual candidates and PAC groups. Some people might freak out because they feel that wealthier people have more control over society. This would mean that wealthy people would be happy.Criminal homework help