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.
In 2008, Citizens United produced a documentary film highly critical of Hillary Clinton called Hillary: The Movie. [14] Fearing prosecution from the FEC, the organization sought a declaratory judgment in federal court to assure their right to show the movie, leading ultimately to the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v.
Columnist argues Citizens United was based on a headnote on an 1886 ruling, not the ruling itself.
FEC, a United States Supreme Court ruling on BCRA, the Act was designed to address two issues: The increased role of soft money in campaign financing, by prohibiting national political party committees from raising or spending any funds not subject to federal limits, even for state and local races or issue discussion;
There’s plenty of reason to question the Missouri senator whose big business donations dried up after he tried to reinstall Donald Trump on Jan. 6, 2021. | Opinion
Super PACs have played increasing role in Oklahoma elections since Citizens United Supreme Court decision. ... those types of groups and campaign spending in the 2010 Citizens United decision. ...
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.
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.