Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
Procedural History:



Citizens United sued the FEC after being blocked from airing a political film about
Hillary Clinton before the primary election.
The District Court for the District of Columbia ruled against Citizens United.
The Supreme Court reversed the ruling in part.
Facts:

Citizens United made a film criticizing Hillary Clinton.

They wanted to show it on TV close to the election.

A law (BCRA) said corporations couldn’t use their money for political messages
close to elections.

Citizens United said this violated free speech.
Issue(s):

Can the government stop corporations from using their own money to speak
about political candidates before an election?
Holding:

No. The law is unconstitutional. Corporations have First Amendment rights too.
Reasoning:

The First Amendment protects independent political speech

Corporate spending doesn’t automatically mean corruption.

The law acted like a speech ban, which the First Amendment doesn’t allow

First Amendment has no basis that the government may impose restrictions on
certain disfavored speakers.
Concurrence / Dissent:


Roberts, Alito, Scalia, and partly Thomas concurred that BCRA was
unconstitutional.
Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Thomas concurred/dissented in part.