Citizens United v. FEC Supreme Court Decision Unleashes Unlimited Corporate Political Spending

The Supreme Court issues its landmark 5-4 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, fundamentally reshaping American campaign finance law by allowing unlimited corporate and union spending in federal elections. The case originated from the conservative organization Citizens United’s challenge to Federal Election Commission restrictions on their anti-Hillary Clinton documentary “Hillary: The Movie” during the 2008 election season. Chief Justice Roberts’ majority opinion overturns century-old restrictions on corporate political expenditures, ruling that corporations have First Amendment free speech rights equivalent to individuals. The decision strikes down key provisions of the McCain-Feingold Act (Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002), specifically the ban on corporate “electioneering communications” within 30 days of primaries or 60 days of general elections. Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion argues that independent expenditures do not create corruption or the appearance of corruption, despite the Court’s own precedent in Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce (1990). The ruling assumes corporate spending will be transparent and truly independent from candidate campaigns, assumptions that prove problematic. Justice Stevens’ 90-page dissent warns that the decision will “unleash the floodgates” of corporate money in politics and undermine democratic equality. The decision immediately opens the door for corporations, unions, and wealthy interests to spend unlimited amounts influencing elections through independent expenditure campaigns, setting the stage for the explosion of super PACs and dark money that follows.