Fear-Driven Jurisprudence: McCutcheon and Unlimited Campaign Contributions as Mechanisms for Entrenching White Supremacy

AARN: Race Pub Date : 2015-01-05 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.2545716
Matthew Reid Krell
{"title":"Fear-Driven Jurisprudence: McCutcheon and Unlimited Campaign Contributions as Mechanisms for Entrenching White Supremacy","authors":"Matthew Reid Krell","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2545716","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The United States Supreme Court, in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, eliminated the authority of the FEC to limit the aggregate donations made by individuals. Now, a donor’s total giving was limited only by a) the limit on the amount they could give to a single candidate, and b) the number of candidates they chose to give to. This paper attempts to analyze patterns of donor giving to determine if the McCutcheon decision has had a crowding-out effect on minority dollars. It then places this decision in a critical context, suggesting that the decision is the new, more respectable, less overt version of Jim Crow - a law designed to ensure that white supremacy, in political and economic terms, remains the law of the land, even as Americans of European descent become a numerical minority.","PeriodicalId":137537,"journal":{"name":"AARN: Race","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AARN: Race","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2545716","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The United States Supreme Court, in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, eliminated the authority of the FEC to limit the aggregate donations made by individuals. Now, a donor’s total giving was limited only by a) the limit on the amount they could give to a single candidate, and b) the number of candidates they chose to give to. This paper attempts to analyze patterns of donor giving to determine if the McCutcheon decision has had a crowding-out effect on minority dollars. It then places this decision in a critical context, suggesting that the decision is the new, more respectable, less overt version of Jim Crow - a law designed to ensure that white supremacy, in political and economic terms, remains the law of the land, even as Americans of European descent become a numerical minority.
恐惧驱动的法理学:麦卡琴和无限制的竞选捐款作为巩固白人至上主义的机制
在麦卡琴诉联邦选举委员会案中,美国最高法院取消了联邦选举委员会限制个人捐款总额的权力。现在,捐赠者的总捐款只受a)他们可以给单个候选人的金额限制,b)他们选择给候选人的数量。本文试图分析捐赠者的捐赠模式,以确定麦卡琴案的判决是否对少数族裔的捐款产生了挤出效应。然后,它把这个决定放在一个关键的背景下,表明这个决定是一个新的,更受人尊敬的,不那么公开的吉姆·克劳法——一个旨在确保白人至上的法律,在政治和经济方面,仍然是这片土地的法律,即使欧洲血统的美国人成为少数民族。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信