Citizens United Vs Fec Research Paper

The Supreme Court’s controversial decision in its 2010 Citizens United v. FEC decision to ban limits on independent political expenditures by corporations incited a massive national dialogue over the issue of corporate personhood and corporations’ rights to free speech. Though politicians, including the President of the United States, and political commentators have referred to the decision as a shocking affront to democracy, the decision stands upon jurisprudence extending back nearly 150 years. The essential question that campaign finance issues beg is whether or not money should be considered speech. In this paper, I will argue that it is impossible to separate speech from the money that enables its dissemination. Further, I have developed
a framework, which outlines the relevant questions leading to an answer to the more practical question of whether the Supreme Court was correct in its Citizens United ruling that corporations are allowed unlimited independent expenditures under the First Amendment. I will first outline forms of political speech and communications. Next, I will examine the government’s compelling interests related to campaign finance regulations. Once the government’s interests are established, I will address the issue of corporate personhood and analyze the application of First Amendment rights to corporations.