Case Study Of Citizens United V. Federal Elections Commission

Decent Essays
In the landmark court case Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission in 2010 the Supreme Court decreed that political expenditures qualified as protected speech and therefore were safeguarded under the First Amendment. This judgement essentially led to the formation of Super PACS, indepentdent action committees, that would allow individuals, unions, and corporations to spend infinite amounts of money in support of or agasint a candidate. One of the major provisions of Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commision was that the spending was independent of the national parties and the candidates’ own campaigns. Another provision was that Super PACs were rewuired to report the names of all donors. Citizens United changed the mindset of

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which occurred in 2010, is a standout amongst the most misconstrued U.S. Preeminent Court choices of cutting edge times. A standard, sensible decision, Citizens United by one means or another turned into a lightning bar for revolutionaries, would-be blue pencils and fanatic hacks over the political range. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is a point of interest 5-to-4 choices by the United States Supreme Court that corporate financing of independent political programs in hopeful races can't be restricted, on the grounds that doing as such would be in resistance with the First Amendment. The choice came about because of the non-benefit company Citizens United's case under the watchful…

    • 319 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Korematsu v. United States (check) (signifigant) Do the President and Congress have the power to excluded United States Citizens of Japanese’s descents without violating the Fifth Amendment, Due Process Clause, and the Fourteenth Amendment, Equal Protection Clause? After the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor in 1942, The American Military became concerned about the Security of the United States. With General DeWitt’s recommendation, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Executive order 9066, “authorizing the removal of any or all people from military areas, as deemed necessary or desirable”. After this order was passed Fred Korematsu, an American born citizen of Japanese decent, had some facial surgery, changed his names and claimed to be…

    • 297 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Judge Casas’ Ruling In APUSA Inc. v The State of California the court rules in favor of APUSA,Inc. The court finds the State of California violated the establishment clause using the Lemon Test and Agostoni test. In both instances the CCQEA explicitly violates the establishment clause by way of money being directly distributed from the government to the religious institutions, joined with a lack of specificity of how the money is to be used. The State of California would be served in adding guidelines to the law clearly dictating that grant money is not to be used for secular purpose.…

    • 316 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Therefore, since these contribution limits would allow candidates to perform effective advocacy, and it would prevent corruption, the defendants argued that this law is constitutional. Amici Curiae Brief in support of defendant at 6, Liberty Pac., v. Madison, No. 1:12-cv-05811 (Dis. Aug. 30,…

    • 1321 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Us government Ms.Crouse Victoria Liu 5/8/2017 Supreme Court case The case Nixon, Attorney General of Missouri, et al. V. Shrink Missouri Government PAC et al. was argued on the 5th of October, 1999. The respondents, Shrink Missouri PAC as a political action committee and Zev David Fredman who was a candidate for Missouri state auditor eyeing the 1998 Republican Party nominations alleged in a suit they filed that a statute in Missouri limiting contributions in the range of $275 to $1075 to candidates running for state office was in violation of their First and Fourteenth Amendments constitutional rights ("Nixon v. Shrink Missouri Government PAC.…

    • 1035 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This case regarding Hinton involves the sixth amendment, various examples of how one can file a motion to suppress a charge/extend the trial, and goes off of the same basis and similarity of “Strickland v Washington”. This Supreme Court case all began in 1985 when a serious of restaurant robberies turned deadly in relatively the same way. Authorities had no leads until one of the restaurant managers survived an attack and picked out Mr. Hinton from a group of pictures presented before him. The police had thus arrested Hinton while recovering a revolver belonging to his mother, which is supposedly the murder weapon, and had charged him with two counts of capital murder. The only defense that worked for Hinton in his criminal trial is the ineffective…

    • 794 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Super Prc Pros And Cons

    • 1622 Words
    • 6 Pages

    In 2010 the United Citizen v. Federal Election Commission would have a bigger impact on the way elections are won. The case decision concluded limiting the amount PACs and donors spend on campaigns for candidates violates the First Amendment. Since the court case decision, Super PACs were created to donate unlimited amounts of money to a campaign for a candidate. Super PACs were mostly used by Republicans. The Democratic party are opposed by Super PACs.…

    • 1622 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Supreme Court Case Study

    • 945 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Court Case Review Throughout the years the United States government has been faced with several discussions. Some of these have become very important throughout history and have left a significate impact on society. These cases range from birth control privacy rights to equality. Among these cases are Griswold V. Connecticut, Baze V. Rees, and Brown V. Board of Education.…

    • 945 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    US V. Nixon Case Study

    • 96 Words
    • 1 Pages

    Based on the textual commitment of lack of judicially discovery and manageable standards, the court found the case was non-justiciable giving them power to rule on it. Nixon doesn’t have absolute privilege to withhold information, therefore his conviction was affirmed. The court held that the question of whether or not the Senate violated the U.S. Constitution was declared non-justiciable. (The Oyez Project, United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974). The clause provides three requirements and as long as those rules weren’t violated, the court could not rule on additional impeachment procedures; done by the Senate…

    • 96 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Some proponents of term limits believe that political PACs would lose some of this power if term limits were imposed because it would disrupt the relationships between candidates and PACs by constantly rotating the politicians in power. However, the agencies that are sophisticated and eager to deploy their money in Washington and, as Sandra Day O’Connor wrote in the 2003 Supreme Court Case that upheld most of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, “Money, like water, will always find an outlet” In the short run, term limits can destroy the long standing relationships between Congressmen and special interest groups, and every decade or two, a new set of Congressmen will be eager for donations. But super PACs and interest groups will continue to funnel money into politics. Most proposals for term limits advocate for the chance to run for election at least once, so politicians will continue to welcome financial support for these campaigns; term limits would force interest groups to work harder to gain their influence with each new class of…

    • 1531 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Democracy for Sale Five years ago Citizens United spearheaded a campaign to steal the people's power and unfortunately the Supreme Court decided to rule in favor of the controversial right-wing group, in the devastating ruling of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. This disastrous move by the "Supreme Court scrapped the previous campaign finance laws and essentially declared that companies are allowed to buy politicians by circumventing restrictions via PACs, political action committees" (Tedford), thus stealing the power of the masses and giving our power to those whose bank accounts resemble that of a country's population. Sadly, the affluent 1% of Americans hold more power than the other 99% of this nation because of the current government's pay to win democracy. Without any…

    • 842 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Federal Election Commission, 2008). The Court also overruled McConnell v. Federal Election Commission that maintained the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act section 203, thus releasing restrictions on independent corporate expenditures (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 2008). The Court specifically ruled that government may not suppress political speech on the basis of speaker’s corporate identity (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 2008). Rather than regulating corporate speech, the Court interpreted the disclosure ruling as unconstitutional to protect Citizen United’s freedom of speech (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 2008). Finally, the Supreme Court maintained the ruling of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 claiming that the disclosure requirements denoted in section 203 were violated by the advertisements for the Citizens United documentary (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission,…

    • 1469 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Campaign Reform

    • 850 Words
    • 4 Pages

    This act incorporates a few provisions to help stop the use of nonfederal money, which is also known as soft money. The act stops national parties from promoting and squandering soft money, it demands state and other committees to fund specific federal activities with hard money, and limits fundraising by federal and nonfederal candidates. In 2010 the Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission was a case dealing with regulating how much organizations spent on campaigns. The courts had decided that it was perfectly fine for labor unions and corporations to spend as much money as they want to help sway people towards a certain candidate. The choice that the courts made about the money did not affect the grants, because it was still illegal for the money to be given straight towards the candidates.…

    • 850 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Donors include people that fund the political candidates. For example, charitable organizations and Political Action Committees. Furthermore, both parties work to expand surveillance…

    • 806 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The case Citizens United V. Federal Election Commission dealt with the control of campaign spending by organizations. The Supreme Court stated that the First Amendment stopped the government from decreasing independent political expenditures by a nonprofit organization. Therefore, the court upheld conditions for public disclosure by sponsors and advertisements. The case did not include a federal ban from corporations or unions to candidate campaigns or political parties, which endure illegal precedents in races for federal office. The court was right for discovering that campaign finance rules failed to avert corruption, commanding restrictions on campaign financing and lobbying any other reason advertising productive economic regulations.…

    • 844 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays