Citizens United v. FEC

Definition

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is a landmark Supreme Court case decided in 2010 that ruled that political spending by corporations and unions is protected under the First Amendment as free speech. This decision significantly impacted the landscape of campaign finance, allowing for increased financial contributions to political campaigns and changing the way elections are financed in the United States.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that restrictions on independent political spending by corporations and unions violated the First Amendment's free speech clause.
2. The case arose from a dispute over whether a documentary critical of then-Senator Hillary Clinton could be aired before the 2008 Democratic primary elections.
3. Following the ruling, the amount of money flowing into U.S. elections dramatically increased, with Super PACs becoming a prominent part of the campaign finance landscape.
4. Critics argue that Citizens United has led to an overwhelming influence of money in politics, increasing the power of wealthy donors and special interests over elected officials.
5. Supporters claim that the ruling protects free speech rights and enables more voices to participate in the political process through financial support.

Review Questions

• How did Citizens United v. FEC change the dynamics of campaign finance in U.S. elections?
  • The Citizens United v. FEC decision fundamentally altered campaign finance by allowing corporations and unions to spend unlimited amounts of money on independent political communications. This shift created a new environment where Super PACs emerged, raising and spending vast sums to influence elections. As a result, financial contributions became a critical factor in determining electoral outcomes, which also raised concerns about the potential for corruption and disproportionate influence by wealthy entities.
• Discuss the implications of the Citizens United ruling on voter representation and political equality.
  • The Citizens United ruling has significant implications for voter representation and political equality by potentially amplifying the voices of wealthy individuals and organizations over ordinary voters. Critics argue that this creates an unequal playing field where those with substantial financial resources can dominate political discourse, leading to policies favoring special interests rather than the broader public. As such, the ruling raises important questions about the integrity of democratic processes and whether all citizens have an equal opportunity to influence their government.
• Evaluate the long-term effects of Citizens United on American democracy and propose potential reforms to address its challenges.
  • The long-term effects of Citizens United on American democracy include increased polarization due to heightened campaign spending and greater reliance on large donors, which may undermine public trust in government. To address these challenges, potential reforms could include implementing stricter transparency requirements for campaign financing, establishing public financing options for candidates, or revisiting limits on corporate spending in politics. Such reforms aim to restore balance and ensure that all citizens have a meaningful voice in the democratic process, countering the disproportionate influence of money in politics.

Related terms

Super PACs: Political action committees that can raise unlimited funds from individuals, corporations, and unions to spend independently on political campaigns, often formed in response to the Citizens United decision.

Political Action Committee (PAC): A type of organization that collects and distributes funds to candidates running for office, usually limited in how much they can donate directly to candidates.

First Amendment:

An amendment to the U.S. Constitution that guarantees freedoms concerning religion, expression, assembly, and the right to petition the government; central to the Citizens United ruling.