Citizens United v. FEC - Wikipedia
WEBCitizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Citizens United Explained - Brennan Center for Justice
WEBDec 12, 2019 · How has Citizens United changed elections in the United States? The ruling has ushered in massive increases in political spending from outside groups, dramatically expanding the already outsized political influence of wealthy donors, corporations, and special interest groups.
FEC | Legal | Citizens United v. FEC - FEC.gov
WEBSummary. On January 21, 2010, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission overruling an earlier decision, Austin v. Michigan State Chamber of Commerce (Austin), that allowed prohibitions on independent expenditures by corporations. The Court also overruled the part of McConnell v.
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
WEBAug 23, 2024 · Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on January 21, 2010, ruled that laws preventing corporations and unions from using general treasury funds for independent political advertising violated the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech.
Ten years on, Citizens United ruling has changed U.S. politics — …
WEBJan 12, 2020 · Ten years on, Citizens United ruling has changed U.S. politics — but not in the way many feared. Protesters gather outside the U.S. Supreme Court in July as Senate Democrats met to to discuss a...
Citizens United v. FEC, 558 U.S. 310 (2010) - Justia US Supreme …
WEBCitizens United v. Federal Election Comm'n: Limiting independent expenditures on political campaigns by groups such as corporations, labor unions, or other collective entities violates the First Amendment because limitations constitute a prior restraint on speech.
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission - SCOTUSblog
WEBSep 9, 2009 · Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Share. Holding: Political spending is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment, and the government may not keep corporations or unions from spending money to support or denounce individual candidates in elections.
Citizens United vs. FEC - HISTORY
WEBMar 26, 2018 · In Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission (FEC), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2010 that political spending is a form of free speech that’s protected under the First Amendment.
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010)
WEBCitizens United, a nonprofit corporation that advocated in various ways against Hillary Clinton in the 2008 presidential primary, argued that a federal law’s bans on independent political advertising was unconstitutional.
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission | Oyez
WEBSep 9, 2009 · Citizens United argued that: 1) Section 203 violates the First Amendment on its face and when applied to The Movie and its related advertisements, and that 2) Sections 201 and 203 are also unconstitutional as applied to the circumstances. The United States District Court denied the injunction.
Skip to content