Citizens United v. FEC

Definition

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is a landmark Supreme Court case from 2010 that ruled that the government cannot limit independent political expenditures by corporations and unions under the First Amendment. This decision fundamentally changed the landscape of campaign finance, allowing for increased spending on political communications and advertising, which significantly influences the dynamics of electoral politics and how candidates communicate with voters.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that restricting independent expenditures for political speech by corporations and unions violates the First Amendment.
2. Following the ruling, the amount of money spent in elections surged, leading to a significant increase in the influence of wealthy donors and special interest groups in politics.
3. The case arose from Citizens United's attempt to air a film critical of Hillary Clinton during the 2008 presidential campaign, which led to legal challenges regarding campaign finance laws.
4. Citizens United v. FEC established that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts cannot be limited, paving the way for the creation of Super PACs.
5. The ruling has been controversial, leading to debates about the balance between free speech and the potential for corruption in political campaigns.

Review Questions

• How did the Citizens United v. FEC ruling impact the role of Super PACs in political campaigns?
  • The Citizens United v. FEC ruling allowed for the creation of Super PACs by permitting unlimited independent expenditures by corporations and unions. This decision fundamentally transformed campaign finance by enabling these entities to raise and spend unlimited funds on political communications. As a result, Super PACs emerged as powerful players in elections, significantly influencing candidate messaging and voter outreach efforts.
• What are some potential consequences of increased spending on political communications following Citizens United v. FEC?
  • The increased spending on political communications following Citizens United has led to several potential consequences, including greater influence of wealthy individuals and organizations over elections, heightened polarization in political discourse due to aggressive advertising tactics, and concerns about transparency regarding the sources of campaign funding. These factors contribute to an uneven playing field where candidates with access to substantial resources may dominate media coverage and voter engagement.
• Evaluate the implications of Citizens United v. FEC on democratic participation and representation in the electoral process.
  • The implications of Citizens United v. FEC on democratic participation and representation are profound, as the ruling may skew political power towards those who can afford to contribute large sums of money through Super PACs. This shift raises concerns about whether elected officials prioritize the interests of wealthy donors over those of ordinary voters, potentially diminishing the principle of equal representation. Moreover, as funding becomes a key determinant of campaign success, it may discourage average citizens from engaging in politics or running for office, thereby weakening grassroots movements and reducing overall democratic participation.

Related terms

Super PACs: Political action committees that can raise unlimited amounts of money from individuals, corporations, and unions to spend on independent political activities, often fueled by the Citizens United ruling.

Political Action Committee (PAC): A type of organization that collects contributions from members and donates them to campaigns for or against candidates, legislation, or ballot initiatives.

First Amendment: The amendment to the U.S. Constitution that protects freedoms concerning religion, expression, assembly, and the right to petition, which was central to the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United.