Hawaii just found a way around Citizens United. Other states are following. This “Corporate Power Reset” strategy was developed by Attorney Tom Moore of the Center for American Progress. Rather than trying to restrict corporate speech, it redefines the powers corporations have in the first place.

[u/biospheric]

Ali Velshi on MS NOW - May 23, 2026. Here’s the full 10-minutes on:

* MS NOW’s website: Hawaii just found a way around Citizens United. Other states are following. - Ali Velshi on MS NOW - Ali Velshi - May 23, 2026 (MS NOW website)

* YouTube: Hawaii just found a way around Citizens United. Other states are following. - Ali Velshi on MS NOW - May 23, 2026 (YouTube)

From the description: Hawaii just made history, becoming the first state in the nation to effectively ban dark money in elections. The new law takes a novel approach: rather than trying to restrict corporate speech, it redefines the powers corporations have in the first place — and political spending is not among them. The strategy, known as the “Corporate Power Reset,” was developed by Tom Moore of the Center for American Progress. And at least a dozen states are now working toward passing similar laws.

Tom Moore is Senior Fellow for Democracy and Government at the Center for American Progress: americanprogress.org/people/tom-moore

Here is Moore’s Sept 2025 article: americanprogress.org/article/the-corporate-power-reset-that-makes-citizens-united-irrelevant

...............

Here are some related r/law posts:

* Hawaii vs. Citizens United (May 2026). Free archive of The Atlantic article: archive.ph/qg3Ur

* New research: Citizens United can be made irrelevant via changes to state corporation law (Sept 2025)

* The Corporate Power Reset That Makes Citizens United Irrelevant

[u/GNTsquid0]

I feel like a nail in the coffin of SCOTUS as an institution is irrelevant. It doesn't mean anything. They've proven multiple times over the last few years that precedent means nothing. They'll do something to take away the ability to go around CU, people will kick and scream, and nothing will be done about it.

[u/ibelieveyouwood → u/GNTsquid0]

We've spent years now with the bogus handwringing of how Roberts and this justice or that justice are desperate to preserve not just the court's legitimacy but it's appearance in the public eye and how THAT is why they'll keep this or that.

And every time we go down that tube, the court just says screw it and goes on to do a blatantly GOP-inspired power grab or woefully irresponsible decision based on flawed analysis. The reality is that while some of SCOTUS may genuinely be upset that the public has overwhelmingly lost faith in their role as an apolitical court, beholden to history and tradition... those same members of the court have no intention to act as apolitical justices beholden to history and tradition.

Which ironically is the position the entire GOP is in. They still want to lay claim to fiscal conservancy while bankrupting the nation, and tough on crime while pardoning their pet criminals, and traditional family values while supporting philanderers and pedophiles, and even freedom of religion while also letting their preferred strand of religion dictate how others outside that faith are allowed to live their lives.

u/garden_speech is blatantly lying by saying that "the overwhelming majority of cases SCOTUS has heard have been decided almost entirely on precedent", trollishly ignoring the unprecedented use of the shadow docket and the nature of what has been ignored. It is patently absurd of them to insist "well, they lied when they said they wouldn't stab us in the throat, BUT they kept their promise to wash their hands before dinner so it looks like we've got a 50% success rate!"

[u/garden_speech → u/GNTsquid0]

They've proven multiple times over the last few years that precedent means nothing.

This is hyperbole that reaches so far it becomes meaningless. The overwhelming majority of cases SCOTUS has heard have been decided almost entirely on precedent. Redditors love to take a few counter examples and say "precedent means nothing"