Last week, as part of our Protect Our Elections campaign, we asked you to contact Congress with calls and letters demanding passage of the DISCLOSE Act to mitigate the corrosive influence of unlimited corporate money on our elections. Partisans, including the Chamber of Commerce and the Tea Party Express, had spent millions to defeat the bill yet we persisted in our quest to get it passed. And on the day of the House vote, you answered our call surpassing over 8000 calls and letters to win the vote! Congress members say that we really helped to make the difference. Thank you.
The Chamber of Commerce, issued a statement blasting the vote: "The Democratic majority in the House jammed through a piece of legislation that clearly violates the Constitution, as well as basic principles of fairness and equity. The Supreme Court calls it 'viewpoint discrimination,' and every first-year law student knows that it's illegal."
Please make sure to let your friends know that we have succeeded so far but the fight is not over. We have to get this through the Senate too. And if you have not yet signed on the petition, please do so here.
Don Siegelman’s Criminal Conviction Vacated By Supreme Court
Several years ago, we launched our Restore Justice At Justice campaign to urge the Department of Justice to reverse the political prosecutions of the Bush Administration. The poster child for these prosecutions is Don Siegelman who was personally targeted by Karl Rove because he was a popular Democrat in the South. The Court of Appeals last year threw out some of Siegelman’s convictions but let several stand under the “honest services” statute.
But yesterday, in a one sentence order, the Supreme Court vacated the convictions of Siegelman and his co-defendant Richard Scrushy, remanding the case to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration in light of a decision from last week that undermined convictions for “honest services.”
In short, the Supreme Court held that federal prosecutions for “honest services” should only take place in clear cases of bribery, something that is not present in Siegelman’s case, where he was accused of appointing a political donor to a job after he donated to a state education fund. So now the Court of Appeals will get to apply to new honest services standards to Siegelman’s case and, if it does so fairly, will have to reverse the convictions.
Again, we want to thank all of you for helping us with our campaign to correct the injustice against Siegelman and all those targeted by the Bush DOJ. Thousands of ordinary citizens signed on to the campaign. If you have not yet done so, go to www.RestoreJusticeAtJustice.com and do so.