Citizens United v. FEC

Definition

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is a landmark Supreme Court case decided in 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 in the U.S., allowing for increased spending in elections, especially in pivotal states like Florida that play a critical role in national elections.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The Citizens United decision allowed corporations and unions to spend unlimited amounts of money on political campaigns, fundamentally shifting how campaigns are financed.
2. This case arose from a dispute over whether a documentary critical of Hillary Clinton could be aired during the election season, showcasing the tension between free speech and campaign finance laws.
3. After the ruling, Super PACs emerged as significant players in elections, particularly in swing states like Florida where large sums of money could sway voter opinions.
4. The ruling has led to an increase in negative advertising and greater influence of wealthy donors in politics, raising concerns about corruption and equal representation.
5. Florida has seen notable impacts from this decision, as its crucial electoral votes make it a prime target for Super PAC spending during national elections.

Review Questions

• How did the Citizens United v. FEC ruling change campaign finance practices in the United States?
  • The Citizens United v. FEC ruling allowed corporations and unions to spend unlimited amounts on independent political campaigns, fundamentally altering campaign finance practices. This decision led to the creation of Super PACs, which can raise and spend unlimited funds to support or oppose candidates without direct coordination with campaigns. As a result, elections became more influenced by wealthy donors and special interest groups, raising concerns about fairness and transparency in the electoral process.
• Discuss the implications of Citizens United v. FEC on political campaigning in swing states like Florida.
  • In swing states like Florida, the Citizens United v. FEC decision has had significant implications for political campaigning due to the influx of unlimited funding from Super PACs. These organizations can now pour vast amounts of money into advertisements aimed at influencing voter behavior during critical election periods. This has led to a more aggressive and competitive campaign atmosphere where financial resources play a decisive role in shaping public opinion and ultimately determining election outcomes.
• Evaluate the long-term effects of Citizens United v. FEC on democratic processes and voter engagement.
  • The long-term effects of Citizens United v. FEC on democratic processes and voter engagement are complex and multifaceted. While the ruling promotes the idea of free speech through financial contributions, it also raises concerns about the potential for corruption and unequal representation in politics. The dominance of Super PACs may discourage average citizens from participating in political discourse, as they feel overshadowed by large financial contributors. Over time, this could lead to disenfranchisement among voters who perceive their voices as drowned out by moneyed interests, ultimately challenging the foundational principles of 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 funded by corporations or unions following the Citizens United ruling.

First Amendment: The part of the U.S. Constitution that protects freedoms such as speech, assembly, and the press, which was central to the Citizens United decision regarding political spending.

Political Action Committee (PAC): An organization that raises and spends money to elect candidates or influence legislation, which operates under different rules than Super PACs following the Citizens United ruling.