this post was submitted on 11 May 2026
300 points (100.0% liked)

politics

29705 readers
2793 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

...The bill takes aim at the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling, which allowed corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money in elections. Lawmakers, drawing from a legal theory developed by the Center for American Progress, argued that because states create corporations and grant them their powers, Hawaii could simply decline to grant corporations the power to spend in elections...

...Democratic Senator Jarrett Keohokalole drew a sharp distinction between the rights of citizens and the powers of corporations, a distinction he said Citizens United had blurred.

“Our rights as individual people don’t come from the government or the Constitution,” Keohokalole said. “As Thomas Jefferson said, all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. They pre-exist the government. The government doesn’t grant us rights. They recognize and protect them.”

Corporate powers, Keohokalole argued, are an entirely different matter.

“They are created by state law,” he said, paraphrasing Chief Justice John Marshall’s 1819 opinion in* Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward*: “A corporation is an artificial being. It possesses only those properties which the charter of its creation confers upon it.”...

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Wilco@lemmy.zip 14 points 14 hours ago

This will work. The state has the right to determine the laws governing corporations ... the corrupt Supreme Court can say a corporation is a person all it wants, individual states can still limit their contributions and take away their status or fine them if they donate more.

[–] Batmorous@lemmy.world 10 points 15 hours ago

Now we need way more states joining in with Hawaii!! Make it illegal in every state that we can!

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 12 points 15 hours ago

Took fucking long enough. I mean it's 99.99% doomed to fail because the corpo bastards have effectively infinite money, but at least somebody actually did something.

[–] akilou@sh.itjust.works 66 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

All men may be created equal but corporations are more equal

[–] arrow74@lemmy.zip 5 points 12 hours ago

All dollars are created equal.

It's your fault other people have more of them then you

[–] CobraCommander@quokk.au 23 points 22 hours ago (1 children)
[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 5 points 18 hours ago

Two legs good

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 33 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Incredble! A glimmer of hope.

[–] lavander@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 14 hours ago

No worries, SCOTUS will bring it back to reality… power doesn’t like when it’s questioned… and SCOTUS will have a saying on the legitimacy of this law 🤷‍♂️

[–] bookmeat@fedinsfw.app 17 points 21 hours ago

Good to see they're starting to put this into action. Heard about this a while ago.

[–] RedWeasel@lemmy.world 19 points 22 hours ago

Should be interesting

[–] grue@lemmy.world 6 points 21 hours ago