Well, I was asking more from a consistency perspective. I take it you disagree with Citizen’s United (I do too), but does that have to be consistent with the belief that boycotts are speech.
Ah, I see.
I would argue no. Because money is speech when used by persons, it boils down to the question of corporate personhood being the same as real people personhood. I argue it is not. I believe there is a spectrum of money equaling speech, and it ends when an actual, breathing person is no longer the speechmaker with money. Right now, we’re on the far end that nearly ALL money equals speech. The pendulum may swing, or it may not. I hope it does.
Does that make sense?