A. Barton Hinkle on the Blatant Hypocrisy of Campaign-Finance Regulations
Like any self-respecting liberal outfit, The New York Times thinks the Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United was an atrocity. The case revolved around whether the government could forbid an incorporated group, Citizens United, from broadcasting a movie critical of Hillary Clinton in the days leading up to an election.
But why is it, observes A. Barton Hinkle, that The New York Times, a corporation, was allowed to publish material critical of candidates in the days leading up to the same election? Nobody, Hinkle writes, has been able to articulate a logically coherent reason to explain why some corporations should be allowed to spread information about a candidate while others cannot.
