Yes, it spent money doing that. Every group that makes a movie, publishes a newspaper, or runs a website spends money on their message. Money isn't speech, but it sure is part of publication.
If you want to say CUI should not have been protected by the 1st amendment in making and distributing a film, you have two choices. Either 1) you also remove 1st amendment protection from every corporation that wants to make and distribute a film. Do you really want do that? Or 2) you need to define the legal criteria that distinguishes the cases where you would do that, from where you would not.
So far, I don't see clear answers on that. Not just from you, but from anyone complaining about the CU decision.
For what it is worth, the CU decision does not affect laws restricting campaign contributions. Texas, for example, has an old law that bans corporations from contributing to political campaigns. All corporations. I think that is a good law. The CU decision has no bearing on it.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read