Citizens United v. FEC
Citation: 558 U.S. 310 (U.S. Supreme Court, 2010)
Facts
Citizens United, a nonprofit corporation, produced and sought to air a critical documentary about Hillary Clinton during the 2008 primary season. The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) prohibited corporations and unions from using general treasury funds for “electioneering communications” (broadcast ads mentioning a federal candidate) within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election. Citizens United challenged the restriction as applied to its film and related ads.
Issue
Does the BCRA’s prohibition on corporate independent expenditures for electioneering communications violate the First Amendment?
Holding
The Court (5–4, Kennedy, J.) overruled Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce (1990) and struck down the BCRA’s restriction on independent corporate expenditures, holding that political speech does not lose First Amendment protection simply because its source is a corporation rather than an individual.
Rule
The First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent political expenditures based on the speaker’s corporate identity. Political speech is at the core of First Amendment protection, and spending money to engage in such speech is itself constitutionally protected. Corporations may not be silenced in political campaigns so long as their expenditures are independent (not coordinated with candidates).
Significance
Citizens United is one of the most consequential and controversial campaign-finance decisions in American history. It opened the door to unlimited independent corporate and union spending in elections and led directly to the creation of Super PACs. Critics argue it equates money with speech and allows corporate interests to dominate elections; supporters argue it protects robust political discourse. Justice Stevens’s 90-page dissent is frequently assigned as a counterpoint.