• Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    That’s the point, the letter of the law means you have to meet a set criteria to prove it. The spirit of the law can look at it and go ‘hey you got this donation, and proceed to act in this corporate interest’ and see the pattern of abuse is acting against the conceptual idea of not being able to be bribed.

    Without this, bribery would be very hard. You would have to literally give them money or houses (like Clarence Thomas), or jobs to their family (also Clarence Thomas).

    So very easy in other words.

    • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Those are actually very hard to get away with. There’s just no direct oversight of the Supreme Court.

      And it’s not illegal to help constituents. That’s literally the purpose of Senators and Representatives in Congress. Your solution would mean that if you donated to AOC and told her “I like your point of view, vote based on that” she would be required to change her vote to the opposite of what you want.