Voting Rights and Democracy

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission involved a broad challenge to Congress’s authority to regulate campaign spending by corporations.

Case Summary

On the last day of the 2008 October Term, the Supreme Court ordered new briefing on whether two key precedents –including a part of McConnell v. FEC, which upheld the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign finance law– should be overruled. On July 31, CAC filed a brief with the League of Women Voters of the United States, explaining that the text and history of our Constitution make clear that campaign expenditures by corporations can be subject to greater regulation than expenditures by individuals.

Starting with the founders, who wrote the Constitution to protect “We the People” and never mentioned “corporations,” our constitutional story has been one of democratic progress, moving American democracy toward broader enfranchisement and more meaningful political participation for individual American citizens. Regulation of corporate influence in elections has helped make this march of progress possible. Before the first campaign finance legislation was passed in 1907, our country was at risk of becoming, as former President Rutherford Hayes wrote in his diary, “a government of corporations, by corporations, and for corporations.” If the Court reverses key precedents allowing regulation of corporate money in elections, corporate influence could once again threaten to overwhelm electoral politics in the United States.

On September 9, 2009, the court re-heard arguments in the case. The following is a statement by CAC’s President and Founder, Doug Kendall, on the oral argument:

“The Court’s newest Justice, Sonia Sotomayor, rightly focused debate today on constitutional first principles: our Constitution was established for the benefit of “we the people,” and never uses the word “corporation.”  Since the dawn of the Republic, the Court has recognized that corporations are artificial entities that enjoy unique advantages and must therefore be subject to greater government oversight. If the Court turns its back on this constitutional text and history, it will blatantly disregard the will of the people and unleash corporate influence on elections.”

In a special session on Thursday, January 21st, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Citizens United, reversing the judgment of the D.C. Circuit Court.

For further explanation of why we feel this case was wrongly decided, read our Text and History narrative report about corporations and the Constitution.

On March 10, 2010 Doug Kendall testified on Citizens United before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Read his written testimony here; for more information about the hearing, to read member statements or watch a video of the hearing go to the official site of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary.

Case Timeline

More from Voting Rights and Democracy

Voting Rights and Democracy
January 21, 2019

OP-ED: The Voting Rights Act is in tatters. Let’s honor King’s legacy by saving it.

The Washington Post
Amid all the paeans to the memory of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. that...
By: David H. Gans
Voting Rights and Democracy
November 19, 2018

OP-ED: How Congress Can Use Its Constitutional Powers to Guarantee Voting Rights for All

Take Care Blog
In collaboration with Election Law Blog, Take Care is pleased to present a series of posts offering thoughts on...
By: David H. Gans
Voting Rights and Democracy
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

California v. Ross; City of San Jose v. Ross

In California v. Ross and City of San Jose, et al. v. Ross, a federal district judge is considering whether the addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 Census violates the Census Clause of...
Voting Rights and Democracy
U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland

Kravitz vs. U.S. Department of Commerce

In Kravitz, et al. vs. U.S. Department of Commerce, et al., a federal district judge is considering whether the addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 Census violates the Census Clause of the Constitution.
Voting Rights and Democracy
June 19, 2018

Symposium: The fight to vindicate our Constitution’s promise of democracy is far from over

Partisan gerrymandering is a cancer on our democracy. Under our Constitution, states cannot rig the...
By: David H. Gans
Voting Rights and Democracy
June 18, 2018

SCOTUS Leaves Gerrymandering Foes ‘Disappointed, But Not Devastated’

Talking Points Memo
Voting rights advocates did not get the Supreme Court decisions they were looking for on...