Homeless History: Citizens United v FEC

Introduction

• Focus on Supreme Court case: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
• Part of AP Government curriculum
• Topic: Campaign finance laws

Background

• Bipartisan Campaign Finance Act (BCRA)
  • Passed in 2002
  • Limits on individual contributions to political candidates
  • Key provision: Illegality for corporations/non-profits to engage in electioneering communications within 60 days of an election and 30 days of a primary

Case Background

• 2008 Democratic Primaries: Contest between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama
• Citizens United: Conservative group created “Hillary: The Movie”
  • Accusations against Hillary Clinton
  • Intended to influence her candidacy
  • Release during the restricted period by BCRA
• Supreme Court Challenge: Citizens United challenged BCRA’s electioneering communication restrictions

Constitutional Principle

• First Amendment: Freedom of speech
• Argument: BCRA’s restrictions violated constitutional protections
• Historical context: Corporations considered associations of individuals, thus having certain constitutional rights

Supreme Court Decision

• Ruling: 5-4 in favor of Citizens United
  • Limiting corporate political advertisements = governmental censorship
  • Struck down part of BCRA
• Decision timing: Two years post the Democratic primary

Significance of the Case

• Money Equals Speech: Political arena dynamic
  • Fairness question: More money = louder voice?
  • Supreme Court's stance: Affirmative
• Outcome: Corporations, labor unions, non-profits can spend unlimited funds if not directly collaborating with candidates
  • Existing laws prevent direct corruption
• Ongoing debate: Public vs. court opinion on campaign finance

Conclusion

• Importance: Continues to impact campaign finance laws
• Available resources: Videos on other required cases for further study
• Call to action: Subscribe for more educational content