Citizens United v. FEC

Definition

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is a landmark Supreme Court case decided in 2010 that ruled corporations and unions can spend unlimited amounts of money on political campaigns, under the First Amendment's protection of free speech. This decision significantly changed the landscape of political advertising and campaign financing, asserting that independent expenditures by these entities do not corrupt or create a quid pro quo relationship with candidates.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of Citizens United, stating that restrictions on independent political expenditures violate the First Amendment.
2. The case arose from a dispute over the documentary 'Hillary: The Movie,' which was deemed a form of electioneering communication and thus subject to campaign finance laws.
3. The ruling led to the rise of Super PACs, allowing these groups to raise unlimited funds while operating independently from candidate campaigns.
4. This decision sparked intense debate over the influence of money in politics and its implications for democracy and elections.
5. Following this ruling, spending on political advertising surged dramatically, fundamentally altering how campaigns are financed in the U.S.

Review Questions

• How did the Citizens United v. FEC ruling affect the interpretation of free speech under the First Amendment?
  • The Citizens United v. FEC ruling expanded the interpretation of free speech under the First Amendment by asserting that spending money in political campaigns is a form of protected speech. The Supreme Court determined that limiting the amount corporations and unions can spend on independent political activities would infringe upon their rights to express their views. This shift emphasized the idea that financial contributions could not be restricted, thereby changing the dynamics of political discourse.
• In what ways did Citizens United v. FEC influence the structure and operations of Political Action Committees (PACs) following its decision?
  • Following Citizens United v. FEC, the influence on Political Action Committees (PACs) was profound as it allowed for the creation of Super PACs. These Super PACs can raise unlimited sums of money from individuals, corporations, and unions to advocate for or against candidates, while remaining independent from any candidate's campaign. This transformation has enabled PACs to play a much larger role in shaping electoral outcomes through significant financial contributions to political advertising.
• Evaluate the long-term implications of Citizens United v. FEC on American democracy and electoral processes.
  • The long-term implications of Citizens United v. FEC on American democracy are significant, as it has led to an unprecedented influx of money in politics, potentially overshadowing the voices of individual voters. Critics argue that this ruling has facilitated a system where wealthy corporations and individuals wield disproportionate influence over elections and policy-making. The resulting environment raises concerns about transparency and accountability in campaign financing, as well as the risk of fostering corruption or preferential treatment for those who contribute large sums to political campaigns.

Related terms

First Amendment: The constitutional amendment that guarantees freedoms concerning religion, expression, assembly, and the right to petition, which includes the protection of free speech.

Political Action Committee (PAC): An organization that raises and spends money to elect or defeat candidates, often formed by corporations, labor unions, or interest groups.

Super PAC: A type of independent political action committee that can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money from individuals, corporations, or unions to advocate for or against political candidates.