There's a good piece from Ruth Marcus in today's Post about the internal inconsistencies of the Citizens United opinion.

[T]he majority flung about dark warnings of "censorship" and "banned" speech as if upholding the existing rules would leave corporations and labor unions with no voice in the political process. Untrue. Under federal election law before the Supreme Court demolished it, corporations and labor unions were free to say whatever they wanted about political candidates whenever they wanted to say it. They simply were not permitted to use unlimited general treasury funds to do so. Instead, they were required to use money raised by their political action committees from employees and members. This is hardly banning speech.

I remember consoling myself when Roberts was confirmed that "at least he's intellectually honest." Marcus makes a pretty compelling case that I was wrong about that.