Richard Briffault is the Joseph P. Chamberlain Professor of Legislation at Columbia Law School. This post is based on his recent article forthcoming in the Chicago Business Law Review.
In Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court invalidated the longstanding ban on the expenditure of corporate funds in federal election campaigns. In so doing, the Court dismissed outright an argument that had long been the foundation for the restriction of corporate money in election campaigns – that, due to the “substantial aggregations of wealth amassed by the special advantages of the corporate form,” corporate money poses a distinct threat to the integrity of democracy. Instead, viewing corporations as essentially “associations of citizens,” Citizens United determined that “the First Amendment does not permit Congress to make . . . categorical distinctions based on the corporate identity of the speaker.” Citizens United’s emphatic language would appear to have doomed all special restrictions on the use of corporate money in elections – contributions as well as expenditures.
