On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 3:47 AM, Mike Godwin <mnemo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Anthony writes: > > "I wonder if the WMF will shut down in protest should one of the > proposals to amend the constitution to overturn Citizens United gain > traction in Congress." > > I'm not speaking for WMF, but I don't see the connection here.
The connection is free speech. > Wikimedia Foundation, as a corporation, is profoundly regulated in > what it can and cannot do politically What regulations are you referring to? Corporations can't *deduct* certain political expenditures. But what are the profound regulations on what it can do politically? > and is even more regulated by > virtue of its being a nonprofit corporation (NGO). More specifically, by its being a 501(C)(3). I'm not aware of any regulation imposed by simply being a nonprofit corporation. And even other 501(C) corporations, such as 501(C)(4) corporations (like Citizens United) are fairly unrestricted. Furthermore, 501(C)(3) is a tax status. The government isn't saying that WMF can't be political. It just isn't allowed certain tax privileges if it does so more than a certain amount. And in some cases it is penalized if it takes the tax advantages first and then does the actions later. > There's no Citizens > United connection with regard to anything being discussed here. WMF is engaging in lobbying, a form of political speech. In the Citizens United decision, "the Court held that the First Amendment prohibited the government from restricting independent political expenditures by corporations and unions". The connection is quite obvious. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l