Legislative Options After Citizens United v. FEC: Constitutional and Legal Issues

摘要

In Citizens United v. FEC, the Supreme Court invalidated two provisions of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), finding that they were unconstitutional under the First Amendment. The decision struck down the long-standing prohibition on corporations using their general treasury funds to make independent expenditures, and Section 203 of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), prohibiting corporations from using their general treasury funds for electioneering communications. BCRA defines electioneering communication as any broadcast, cable, or satellite communication that refers to a clearly identified federal candidate made within 60 days of a general election or 30 days of a primary. The Court determined that these prohibitions constitute a ban on speech in violation of the First Amendment. The Court, however, upheld the disclaimer and disclosure requirements in Sections 201 and 311 of BCRA as applied to a movie regarding a presidential candidate that was produced by Citizens United, a tax-exempt corporation, and the broadcast advertisements it planned to run promoting the movie.