**Citizens United (disambiguation)**
**Definition:**
„Citizens United” primarily refers to a landmark 2010 United States Supreme Court case concerning campaign finance laws. The term may also denote the organization involved in the case, as well as other entities or concepts associated with the name.
—
# Citizens United (disambiguation)
The term „Citizens United” is most commonly associated with the 2010 United States Supreme Court decision *Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission*, a pivotal case that reshaped the landscape of campaign finance law in the United States. However, „Citizens United” can also refer to the nonprofit organization behind the case, as well as other uses of the name in various contexts. This article provides an overview of the primary meanings and related topics associated with „Citizens United.”
—
## Contents
1. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
1.1 Background
1.2 Supreme Court Decision
1.3 Impact and Controversy
2. Citizens United (Organization)
2.1 History and Mission
2.2 Activities and Influence
3. Other Uses of „Citizens United”
3.1 Similar Organizations
3.2 Related Terms and Concepts
4. See Also
5. References
—
## 1. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
### 1.1 Background
*Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission* is a landmark Supreme Court case decided in 2010. The case originated when Citizens United, a conservative nonprofit organization, sought to air a documentary critical of then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton during the 2008 Democratic primaries. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) prohibited the airing of the film under the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), commonly known as the McCain-Feingold Act, which restricted „electioneering communications” by corporations and unions close to elections.
Citizens United challenged the FEC’s restrictions, arguing that they violated the First Amendment’s free speech protections.
### 1.2 Supreme Court Decision
On January 21, 2010, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that the government could not restrict independent political expenditures by corporations and unions. The majority opinion, authored by Justice Anthony Kennedy, held that political spending is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment, and that the government’s interest in preventing corruption did not justify limits on independent expenditures.
The ruling effectively overturned previous precedents, including *Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce* (1990) and parts of *McConnell v. FEC* (2003), which had allowed restrictions on corporate political spending.
### 1.3 Impact and Controversy
The decision dramatically changed the campaign finance landscape by allowing corporations, unions, and other organizations to spend unlimited funds on political communications independently of candidates’ campaigns. This led to the rise of Super Political Action Committees (Super PACs), which can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections, provided they do not coordinate directly with candidates or parties.
The ruling has been highly controversial. Supporters argue it protects free speech and political participation, while critics contend it gives disproportionate influence to wealthy interests and undermines democratic processes.
—
## 2. Citizens United (Organization)
### 2.1 History and Mission
Citizens United is a nonprofit conservative organization founded in 1988 by Floyd Brown. The group is known for producing political documentaries and advocating for conservative causes. Its mission includes promoting free enterprise, limited government, and traditional values.
The organization gained national prominence through its involvement in the 2010 Supreme Court case bearing its name.
### 2.2 Activities and Influence
Citizens United produces films and media content aimed at influencing public opinion and political discourse. Notable productions include *Hillary: The Movie*, which was central to the Supreme Court case, as well as other documentaries critical of liberal politicians and policies.
Beyond media production, Citizens United engages in political advocacy, lobbying, and grassroots mobilization. The organization has played a significant role in shaping conservative political strategies, particularly in the realm of campaign finance and election law.
—
## 3. Other Uses of „Citizens United”
### 3.1 Similar Organizations
The name „Citizens United” or similar variants are sometimes used by other groups or coalitions at local or state levels, often unrelated to the conservative nonprofit or the Supreme Court case. These organizations may focus on civic engagement, government transparency, or community advocacy.
### 3.2 Related Terms and Concepts
– **Super PACs:** Political action committees that can raise and spend unlimited funds independently of candidates, a concept enabled by the *Citizens United* ruling.
– **Campaign Finance Reform:** Efforts to regulate the influence of money in politics, often in response to the effects of the *Citizens United* decision.
– **First Amendment and Free Speech:** Constitutional principles central to the legal arguments in the *Citizens United* case.
– **Electioneering Communications:** Broadcast, cable, or satellite communications that refer to a clearly identified candidate and are made within certain timeframes before elections, subject to regulation under federal law.
—
## 4. See Also
– *McCain-Feingold Act* (Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002)
– *Buckley v. Valeo* (1976)
– *Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce* (1990)
– *McConnell v. Federal Election Commission* (2003)
– Political Action Committee (PAC)
– Super PAC
– Campaign finance in the United States
—
## 5. References
*Note: This article is a summary based on publicly available information and does not include direct citations.*
—
**Meta Description:**
„Citizens United” primarily refers to a landmark 2010 U.S. Supreme Court case on campaign finance, but also denotes the nonprofit organization involved and other related uses. This article clarifies the different meanings associated with the term.