Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
E33469
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is a landmark 2010 U.S. Supreme Court case that dramatically expanded the political spending rights of corporations and unions by treating such expenditures as protected speech.
Aliases (3)
Statements (50)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
→
campaign finance case → landmark case → |
| areaOfLaw |
campaign finance law
→
constitutional law → election law → |
| arguedDate |
2009-03-24
→
|
| chiefJusticeAtDecision |
John G. Roberts
NERFINISHED
→
|
| citation |
558 U.S. 310
→
|
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
→
|
| country |
United States
→
|
| court |
Supreme Court of the United States
→
|
| decidedIn |
October Term 2009
→
|
| decisionDate |
2010-01-21
→
|
| defendant |
Federal Election Commission
→
|
| dissentingOpinionBy |
John Paul Stevens
NERFINISHED
→
|
| docketNumber |
No. 08-205
→
|
| effect |
allowed corporations to spend unlimited funds on independent political communications
→
allowed labor unions to spend unlimited funds on independent political communications → led to growth of Super PACs → |
| fullName |
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
→
|
| holding |
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act limits on corporate independent expenditures are unconstitutional
→
Government may not suppress political speech on the basis of the speaker’s corporate identity → Restrictions on independent political expenditures by corporations and unions violate the First Amendment → |
| joinedDissent |
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
→
Sonia Sotomayor → Stephen Breyer NERFINISHED → |
| joinedMajority |
Anthony Kennedy
→
Antonin Scalia → Clarence Thomas → John G. Roberts → Samuel Alito → |
| legalIssue |
First Amendment free speech
→
campaign finance regulation → independent political expenditures → |
| majorityOpinionBy |
Anthony Kennedy
→
|
| overruledPrecedent |
Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce
→
part of McConnell v. Federal Election Commission → |
| plaintiff |
Citizens United
→
|
| rearguedDate |
2009-09-09
→
|
| relatedStatute |
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act
→
Federal Election Campaign Act → |
| separateOpinionBy |
Antonin Scalia
NERFINISHED
→
Clarence Thomas NERFINISHED → John G. Roberts NERFINISHED → |
| shortName |
Citizens United v. FEC
→
|
| topic |
corporate political spending
→
electioneering communications → union political spending → |
| yearDecided |
2010
→
|
Referenced by (7)
| Subject (surface form when different) | Predicate |
|---|---|
|
Republic, Lost
("Citizens United v. FEC decision")
→
|
critiques |
|
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
→
|
fullName |
|
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
→
|
hasLandmarkCase |
|
Clarence Thomas
→
|
notableCaseInvolvement |
|
Anthony M. Kennedy
→
|
notableCaseOpinion |
|
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
("Citizens United")
→
|
plaintiff |
|
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
("Citizens United v. FEC")
→
|
shortName |