Question

Chick-fil-A, a popular fast food restaurant chain, has publicly declared its support for traditional marriage between a man and a woman since 2012. Although they had a period of making corporate donations to nonprofit Christian organizations that advocate the same position, since 2015 they ceased making donations to any organization that promotes discrimination against same sex couples or people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. However, since the election of Donald Trump as president of the U.S., several members of the executive management team have been meeting to discuss a plan for financial support over the next four years for political candidates who support a more conservative political agenda, notably; pro-life/ anti-choice with respect to abortion rights; diminished options in corporate health care plans for reproductive choice, including the birth control pill; expansion of gun rights; and enforcement of border patrol and implementation of stricter immigration policies. A consumer group has received information about this proposed financial plan and wants to sue Chick-fil-A to prevent the company from supporting any such political candidates. The group seeks your advice on the legitimacy and efficacy of a lawsuit. Advise them of their likely or unlikely success.

Use the IRAC method to support your recommendation.

Answer 1

Issue, a restaurant that deals with fast food has been in supporting the conservative marriage culture of male and female marriages, it also support the organization that support the same conservative culture, though it is against any discrimination that may be viewed towards same sex marriages, in the recent case, it is proposing a deal to support the presidential candidate who will bring stricter immigration policy, right to own guns, the question is can this policy succeed within the court of law?

Rule, under USA law, no presidential candidate is supposed to use his own money for the companies, organization or even individual has a right to support such candidate but within the province of the law, the support that a candidate may have is associated with the political agenda with the like minded organization who offer a bid to support them . The support must be based on the political agenda.

Application, where there is any polices that a politician is considering doing after election, it is the duty of the citizen to either elect or not to elect that candidate, political agenda is most often not actionable I court if it is the will of the people to exercise it through their representatives

Conclusion, this case will not succeed because this is the expression of the will of the people which can only be determine through election.

****Please please please LIKE THIS ANSWER, so that I can get a small benefit, Please****