And Bradely Smith wipes out foreign stockholders

I knew the National Review was a Communist organization, but not until now did they explicitly wipe out the property rights of foreign shareholders:

He claims:

"The Court held that 2 U.S.C. Section 441a, which prohibits all corporate political spending, is unconstitutional. Foreign nationals, specifically defined to include foreign corporations, are prohibiting from making "a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State or local election" under 2 U.S.C. Section 441e, which was not at issue in the case. Foreign corporations are also prohibited, under 2 U.S.C. 441e, from making any contribution or donation to any committee of any political party, and they prohibited from making any "expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication... ."

The hell it wasn't an issue in this case. The recent decision makes it perfectly legal for foreign shareholders to invest in political corporations. Foreign stockholders are anonymous, that is one of the effects of the corporate charter, that is why these are corporations, the limited immunity the anonymity. The new ruling gives any shareholder of Citizens Unitied exactly the right to invest in political ads. The previous ruling was for foreign people, not shareholders. Congress never restricted foreign shareholders, because it never occurred to Congress that the corporate charter extended the rights of shareholders beyond the original contract.