Logourl black
From our private database of 12,700+ case briefs...

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

United States Supreme Court
558 U.S. 50 (2010)

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

Facts

Citizens United (plaintiff) is a nonprofit corporation that primarily accepts funds from private donations, with a small portion of its funds coming from for-profit corporations. In January 2008, Citizens United produced a documentary film that was essentially a negative advertisement urging viewers to vote against then-Senator Hillary Clinton in the 2008 Democratic primary election. Citizens United released the film in theaters and on DVD, and began running advertisements about the film’s future release on video-on-demand. The film and advertisements amounted to “express advocacy” by Citizens United, and thus raised concerns under § 441(b) of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA). Section 441(b) makes it a felony for all corporations–including nonprofit advocacy corporations–either to expressly advocate the election or defeat of candidates or to broadcast electioneering communications within thirty days of a primary election or sixty days of a general election. Section 441(b) carves out an exception for Political Action Committees (PACs) in that it permits the political speech of these groups, even when the PACs are formed by corporations. Citizens United challenged the constitutionality of § 441(b) in federal district court against the Federal Election Commission (FEC) (defendant) on the ground that § 441(b) was an unconstitutional restriction of freedom of speech for corporations. The district court ruled for the FEC, and Citizens United appealed to the United States Supreme Court.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Kennedy, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Concurrence (Scalia, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Dissent (Stevens, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 120,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 12,700 briefs, keyed to 172 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.