A recent symposium at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law featured several frequent ACS participants as part of what legal expert Stanley Fish called "a group of A-list first amendment scholars." The Brennan Center convened the cadre of scholars "to rethink the relationship of money, politics and the Constitution" in the wake of the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision in Citizens United v. FEC, which loosened regulations of corporate electioneering.
Af the event, Fish writes:
[I]t is the spirit of the occasion rather than any one thing said during it that impressed. This crowd thinks that it is going to win, thinks, as one participant put it, that Citizens United was "a huge reach" and "sits on a bubble," ready to be toppled. At most of the conferences I attend, talk like that would be little more than blowing smoke. But in this one the speakers and respondents were high-profile law professors, deans of prestigious law schools, lawyers who have argued before the Court and interacted, formally and informally, with its members. It occurred to me as I left at the end of the day that as a result of what had been said and proposed something in the world might actually change. The very thought made me nervous.