2. While, as you rightly point out, Congress does indeed have denial of jurisdiction as an arrow in its quiver (Article III, sect. 2); Congress has not used this provision with determination in many decades — and never since Earl Warren and his successors put the federal courts onto the path of egregious usurpation.

3. And so the bow must be restrung (Congressional rotation in office and other reforms), and the aforesaid arrow sharpened, in order to restore the constitutional scheme of checks and balances.

On how Article III, sect. 2 might be strengthened, “Curbing Court Usurpation,” in the 7th chapter of my online book,
http://www.tell-usa.org/totl/07-%20Accountability,%20Efficiency%20&%20Cuts.htm#Part1

In fact there is nothing democratic at all about having unelected, irremovable, life tenured judges decide our basic direction as a society. It renders moot the debate about whether the United States is a democracy or a republic. Under a judicial oligarchy it is neither.

The unconditional defense and the ‘better than any other system devised by man’ arguments do not impress me. I equate them with the Jewish defense of their Law and tradition. As valid as it was it tragically missed the whole purpose, and so the “vineyard” was given to others. We will lose this great nation for the same reason. Government and business amorality is not the purpose of any society. We are enshrining this fraudulent concept and the profits of amorality are in windfall abundance. Even our catholic legislators and entrepreneurs are capitalizing on it.

They are the reflection of who we are as a church and as a society – land of the free to do evil as long as it pays and is in line with the Law.

I hope we can agree that this was a clear restriction on free speech, and on political free speech at that. Citizen’s United is funded by little people like you and me who, yes, want to get a particular polital viewpoint to be aired. It was OUR rights that were being trampled, and this Supreme Court decision rectified that.

will there be negative fallout? Certainly. But free political discourse is messy. Let’s cheer the messiness; it’s a whole lot better than governmentally-controlled, viewpoint-restricted tidiness.

But what about the fact that citizens can go to prison for their misdeeds, whereas corporations cannot? Since corporations cannot be held accountable in the same way as citizens, and since they are not people at all, how can corporations have the same rights under the First Amendment? The Constitution begins with the words, “We the People,” not we the corporations.

Z. asks what alternative I propose to capitalism? I propose that it be retained in upgraded form, along the lines of Pope John Paul’s “economy for the people, not people for the economy.” (Laborem Exercens) One of the fundamental problems that cries out for a solution is chronic unemployment. See, for example, chapter 8 “Bolstering Workers: Structuring Full-Employment Into Capitalism,” in my online book
http://www.tell-usa.org/totl/

What we have today is “crony capitalism” or what some are calling “corporatism.”