Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
At the conference among the justices after oral argument, the vote was 5–4 in favor of Citizens United being allowed to show the film. The justices voted the same as they had in Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc., a similar 2007 case. [22]
In March 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, regarding whether or not a political documentary about Hillary Clinton could be considered a political ad that must be paid for with funds regulated under the Federal Election Campaign Act. [18]
The amendment was proposed in response to the implications presented in the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010), a U.S. constitutional law case concerning the regulation of independent political expenditures by corporations, which the nonprofit organization Citizens United challenged on the ...
And he played a pivotal role in court challenges that resulted in Citizens United v. FEC, the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision that paved the way for virtually unlimited and often undisclosed ...
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Mitchell (1970), the Supreme Court considered whether the voting-age provisions Congress added to the Voting Rights Act in 1970 were constitutional. The Court struck down the provisions that established 18 as the voting age in state and local elections. However, the Court upheld the provision establishing the voting age as 18 in federal elections.
After stumbling over the words of a dissenting opinion (in the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case) he was reading from the bench in January that year, he knew his time had come.
In as part of the 2010 Citizens United v. FEC decision, U.S. Supreme Court defined money as a form of speech. A number of jurisdictions reacted by modifying existing laws or trying to pass new laws. On June 27, 2011, ruling in the consolidated cases Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett and McComish v.