Citizens United v. FEC

The court issued an Errata for its recent opinion in Citizens United v. FEC.   No, it wasn’t that sweeping.  It reads, in part:

The third sentence of the second full paragraph on page 11 is stricken. This sentence read: “Whether the Supreme Court will ultimately adopt that line as a ground for holding the disclosure and disclaimer provisions unconstitutional is not for us to say.”

The sentence contained a footnote citing Majors v. Abell, 361 F.3d 349, 356–57 (7th Cir. 2004) (Easterbrook, J., dubitante).   Dubitante?  “Having doubts (used of a judge who expresses doubt about but does not dissent from a decision reached by a court).”

Comments are closed.