Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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.
Citizens United was the plaintiff in a Supreme Court case that began as a challenge to various statutory provisions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), known as the "McCain-Feingold" law. The case revolved around the documentary Hillary: The Movie, which was produced by Citizens United.
Here's what AOL readers were buying during the Cyber Monday sale at Walmart
Columnist argues Citizens United was based on a headnote on an 1886 ruling, not the ruling itself. Skip to main content. 24/7 Help. For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to ...
In December 2007, Citizens United v.Federal Election Commission. was filed at the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. A special three-judge panel (as specified in BCRA) sided with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) that under the McCain-Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, Hillary: The Movie could not be shown on television right before the 2008 Democratic primaries.
But if not for the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. FEC, they could have simply had the government ban the movie for them. Citizens United has become a popular object of scorn, ...
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.
With its ruling the Supreme Court upheld its Citizens United landmark decision. [19] While the Citizens United decision initially appeared to apply equally to state contests, [20] the Supreme Court ruled in American Tradition Partnership, Inc. v. Bullock that the Citizens United holding does so by applying it to Montana state law. [4]