Ryan, Paul S.
March 2013
University of Toledo Law Review;Spring2013, Vol. 44 Issue 3, p583
Academic Journal
The article reflects on faulty assumptions of the U.S. Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission which was regarding constitutionality of political independent expenditure by corporations. It explains how close relationships between political candidates and independent spenders give rise to corruption. It suggests some law reforms that distinguishes independent from coordinated political spending and provide voters with the information needed to make informed decisions.


Related Articles

  • Citizens United v. FEC. Clift, Eleanor // NonProfit Times;4/1/2010, Vol. 24 Issue 6, p19 

    The article discusses the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court decision on Citizens United v. FEC lifting the caps on the amount of money corporations and unions can spend to promote political candidates. It mentions supporters of the decision like Cleta Mitchell, a partner at the Foley & Lardner...

  • SUPREME COURT TO OK AL QAEDA DONATION FOR PALIN? Palast, Greg // Progressive Populist;2/1/2010, Vol. 16 Issue 2, p13 

    The article reports on the would-be decision of the U.S. Supreme Court on corporate and institutional donations to political candidates. It mentions that the issue is whether corporations as an unnatural person can make contributions to political campaigns. It notes that the would-be ruling of...

  • Should Media Consultants Really Jump for Joy? D'Aprile, Shane // Politics (Campaigns & Elections);Mar2010, Vol. 31 Issue 3, p14 

    The article talks about the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the case of Citizens United and the potential response to media consultants to the decision. It cites several disadvantages such as the rise in expenditures, creating a strategic problem for candidate campaigns, more airway clutter, and...

  • Supreme Court Strikes Down Montana Law, Reaffirms Citizens United.  // New American (08856540);7/23/2013, Vol. 28 Issue 14, p8 

    The article reports on the reaffirmation of the U.S. Supreme Court decision for the court case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (FEC) in the case American Tradition Partnership Inc. v. Bullock. It says that the reaffirmation affected the law of Montana state that bans independent...

  • Corporate Cash May Bend Political Agendas. Zeidner, Rita // HR Magazine;Mar2010, Vol. 55 Issue 3, p18 

    The article focuses on the speculations surrounding the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which expands the First Amendment rights of corporations.

  • Is the Citizens United Decision Hurting Democracy?  // U.S. News Digital Weekly;9/24/2010, Vol. 2 Issue 38, p11 

    The author comments on whether the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court on the case Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission affects U.S. democracy. In the case, the Court ruled that companies can spend money on political campaigns. The author believes that the ruling does not affect...

  • The Race Is On. Fischer, Raymond L. // USA Today Magazine;Nov2011, Vol. 140 Issue 2798, p18 

    The article asserts that the 2010 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the Citizens United versus (v.) the Federal Election Commission overturning a long-term trend to limit political spending of corporations will set the stage for a lucrative 2012 presidential campaign. It mentions that the...

  • CONTRACTING AROUND CITIZENS UNITED. Sitaraman, Ganesh // Columbia Law Review;Apr2014, Vol. 114 Issue 3, p755 

    The Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. FEC is widely considered a major roadblock for campaign finance reform, and particularly for limiting third party spending in federal elections. In response to the decision, commentators, scholars, and activists have outlined a wide range of...

  • Groups Try to Cut Flow of Election Bucks.  // Multichannel News;1/23/2012, Vol. 33 Issue 4, p25 

    The article focuses on the Citizens United decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruling which permits corporations and unions to fund electioneering advertisements for and against political candidates in the run-up to election primaries. As stated, decision was a financial boon to...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics