Read justice john paul stevens’s dissenting opinion in the citizens united case. at bottom, the court's opinion is thus a rejection of the common sense of the american people, who have recognized a need to prevent corporations from undermining self government since the founding, and who have fought against the distinctive corrupting potential of corporate electioneering since the days of theodore roosevelt. –justice stevens dissenting opinion citizens united v. federal elections commission what does justice stevens say about the court’s ruling? a. corporate money will make elections more likely to reflect the public will. b. corporate money will have no influence on elections. c. corporate money has changed since the days of theodore roosevelt. d. corporate money will make elections less likely to reflect the public will.

Justice Stevens did say about the Court’s ruling  that Corporate money will make elections less likely to reflect the public will.

Associate Justice John Paul Stevens  was said to have declared that the court's ruling stands as a kind of "a rejection of the common sense of the American citizen, who have seen a need to hinder corporations from looking low at self government."

The Court was said to have ruled, in5-4, that the First Amendment hinders or place a limits on corporate funding of independent broadcasts in terms of candidate election.

Learn more about  Court’s ruling from

link

false

true

true

false

true

jefferson hoped to establish trade with the native american people of the west and find a water route to the pacific. jefferson also was fascinated by the prospect of what could be learned about the geography of the west, the lives and languages of the native americans, the plants and animals, the soil, the rocks, the weather, and how they differed from those in the east.