Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

Summary

The Supreme Court held that the First Amendment prohibits the federal government from suppressing independent political expenditures by corporations and unions. The Court overruled Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce and the relevant portion of McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, while upholding disclaimer and disclosure requirements. The decision concluded that the federal ban on corporate-funded independent expenditures could not constitutionally be applied to Citizens United’s film Hillary: The Movie.

Holdings

1. The video-on-demand distribution of Hillary was an electioneering communication covered by 2 U.S.C. § 441b because it was a cable communication referring to a clearly identified federal candidate, made within thirty days of a primary, and capable of being received by at least 50,000 persons.
2. Hillary was the functional equivalent of express advocacy because it was susceptible of no reasonable interpretation other than as an appeal to vote against Senator Clinton.

Questions Presented

1. Whether 2 U.S.C. § 441b covered Citizens United's video-on-demand distribution of Hillary under the statutory and regulatory definition of an electioneering communication.
2. Whether Hillary was the functional equivalent of express advocacy and therefore subject to § 441b under the framework of McConnell and Wisconsin Right to Life.
3. Whether § 441b's prohibition on corporate-funded independent expenditures violated the First Amendment.
4. Whether Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce and the portion of McConnell v. Federal Election Commission upholding BCRA § 203 should be overruled.
5. Whether BCRA §§ 201 and 311, imposing disclosure and disclaimer requirements, were unconstitutional as applied to Hillary and its promotional advertisements.