Citizens United v. FEC

Definition

Citizens United v. FEC is a landmark Supreme Court case from 2010 that ruled that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts cannot be limited under the First Amendment. This decision reinforced the principle that political speech, regardless of the speaker's identity, is protected and emphasized the role of money in political campaigns. The ruling has sparked significant debate over the influence of money in politics and raised questions about the relationship between corporations and free speech rights.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The Citizens United case specifically challenged provisions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) that restricted independent expenditures by corporations and unions.
2. The Supreme Court's decision was 5-4, with the majority arguing that political spending is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment.
3. As a direct result of this ruling, there was a significant increase in the amount of money spent in U.S. elections, with many large donations coming from corporations and wealthy individuals.
4. The ruling also led to the creation of Super PACs, which can raise unlimited funds but are required to operate independently from candidates’ campaigns.
5. Critics argue that Citizens United has led to a system where wealthy individuals and corporations have disproportionate influence over political outcomes, undermining democratic principles.

Review Questions

• How did the Citizens United v. FEC ruling affect the landscape of campaign financing in American politics?
  • The Citizens United v. FEC ruling significantly transformed campaign financing by allowing corporations and unions to spend unlimited amounts on political advocacy. This change led to the rise of Super PACs, which could raise and spend vast sums independently of candidates’ campaigns. As a result, the influence of money in elections grew dramatically, prompting debates about fairness and access within the electoral process.
• Analyze the implications of the Citizens United decision on free speech rights in relation to corporate entities.
  • The Citizens United decision expanded free speech rights to include corporations, asserting that they can engage in political spending just like individuals. This raises complex questions about the nature of free speech—whether it should be equally applied to entities with vast financial resources as it is to individual citizens. The implications are profound, as it suggests that financial power equates to more political voice, potentially drowning out individual voters and changing how democracy functions.
• Evaluate the long-term effects of Citizens United on American democracy and electoral integrity.
  • The long-term effects of Citizens United on American democracy are still unfolding but have already sparked significant concerns regarding electoral integrity. The increase in money spent by Super PACs and corporations has raised fears about corruption and unequal representation in politics. Many believe this trend could erode trust in democratic institutions and lead to policies favoring those with financial power over the general populace, ultimately challenging the fundamental principles of representative democracy.

Related terms

Super PACs: Political action committees that can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money to advocate for or against political candidates, often formed as a result of the Citizens United ruling.

First Amendment:

The amendment to the U.S. Constitution that protects freedom of speech, including political speech, which was central to the arguments in Citizens United v. FEC.

Political Action Committee (PAC): An organization that collects political donations from members and uses them to support or oppose candidates, parties, or legislation.