Every day we publish breathtaking articles. new york times, And liberal media reported on hush money allegedly illegally paid by Donald Trump to support his 2016 presidential campaign. Indeed, Donald Trump, like the Trump Organization, has a First Amendment right to spend money to further his electoral ambitions.in Buckley vs Valeo, the Supreme Court erroneously upheld spending limits on how much non-candidates could spend on elections, but wealthy individuals like Donald Trump rightly held that they could spend as much of their own money as they wanted on their campaigns. The decision was made. They can then use the money for hush-money payments, television and radio advertising, or other legal ways to further their campaigns and electoral ambitions.
To the extent that Trump spent his own money on his 2016 presidential campaign, he had a First Amendment right to do so. Buckley vs Valeo. Trump also had a First Amendment right to do so, as long as he was spending Trump Organization funds. Buckley vs Valeo It is and always will be unconstitutional. Buckley vs Valeo This law should be overturned to the extent that it upholds constitutional restrictions on the spending of funds by anyone or any organization to influence the outcome of an election.
Recording the hush-money payments as „legal costs“ suggests that President Trump did not believe the allegations against him were true, was protecting his family, or was trying to protect the porn stars and others. It simply reflects that President Trump considered the payoff for extortion to be legitimate. Although the settlement did not confirm his guilt, it was meant to help his 2016 campaign, and it did. Inaccurate accounting records are at best a misdemeanor. Prosecutors in the New York District Attorney's Office have not and cannot charge President Trump with embezzlement or fraud.
Donald Trump should appeal any ruling against him in a New York state criminal case to the U.S. Supreme Court. He should assert his First Amendment rights based on: Buckley vs Valeo and to that extent buckley If the ruling against Trump is allowed to pass, he should seek to impose limits on campaign spending across his organization. Buckley vs Valeo Rejected.legal experts know that Buckley vs Valeo Even before his recent appointment to the Supreme Court, he was a „derelict in the legal waters.“ trump vs new york The United States Supreme Court should declare Buckley vs Valeo Must be dead on arrival.
All Mr. Trump must do to prevail in this farcical criminal case is assert his First Amendment rights at every level of the New York court system and demand at every step: Only. Buckley vs Valeo To the extent that it prohibits the expenditure in question, it may be rejected. Naturally, no one can spend money on bribing election officials or other illegal activities. But little of what President Trump did was illegal. Trump had a First Amendment right to pay the hush money he allegedly paid in 2016.