06/19/2026
What is Citizens United?
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) is one of the most consequential and controversial U.S. Supreme Court decisions in modern history. At its core, the ruling fundamentally changed how political campaigns are funded by allowing corporations and labor unions to spend unlimited amounts of money on elections.
The case started in 2008. A conservative nonprofit organization called Citizens United produced a documentary titled Hillary: The Movie, which was highly critical of then-Senator Hillary Clinton during her presidential primary campaign.
Citizens United wanted to broadcast the film on cable television via video-on-demand right before the primary elections. However, a federal law called the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA)—often known as the McCain-Feingold Act—prohibited corporations and unions from funding "electioneering communications" (political ads or media mentioning a candidate) within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) blocked them from airing it, prompting Citizens United to sue.
In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Citizens United. The majority opinion made two massive legal determinations:
1. The Court held that the First Amendment protects political speech, regardless of whether that speech comes from an individual or a corporation. Restricting a corporation's ability to spend money on political speech was viewed as an outright ban on speech.
2. The Court also ruled that while the government could still limit direct cash donations to a candidate's campaign (to prevent direct bribery), it could not limit independent expenditures. This meant corporations, billionaires, and unions could spend as much money as they wanted on ads supporting or attacking a candidate, as long as they didn't officially "coordinate" with that candidate's campaign.
The Citizens United ruling completely reshaped the American political landscape in two major ways:
1. Following the ruling, lower courts applied its logic to strike down limits on individual contributions to independent political groups. This led to the creation of Super PACs (Political Action Committees)—organizations that can take unlimited financial contributions from wealthy individuals and corporations to influence elections.
2. The Supreme Court assumed that all of this new corporate spending would be fully transparent through public disclosures. Instead, political actors utilized specific types of nonprofits that are allowed to engage in political spending but are not legally required to disclose who their donors are. This anonymous political spending became known as "dark money".
The decision gives corporations massive, unfair influence over democracy. Treating corporations as "people" with free speech rights allows vast aggregations of wealth to drown out the voices of regular citizens.
Because it was a Supreme Court decision interpreting the Constitution, Citizens United cannot be undone by a regular act of Congress. It could only be overturned if the Supreme Court reverses its own precedent in a future case, or if the U.S. passes a Constitutional Amendment.
Please like, common, share, and follow:
Sound Minded Progressives
