A Supreme Court ruling this week could determine how much influence corporate entities, unions and activist groups will have in political campaign finance for years to come.
According to Salon.com, the case at hand centers on a conservative group called Citizens United, who produced a film criticizing then-candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton during the ’08 Democratic presidential primary. Wanting to air ads that promoted the film’s distribution via video-on-demand on cable, CU–an incorporated group that takes corporate funds–was told by the Federal Election Commission that it could only use limited, disclosed contributions from individuals to promote and broadcast it. After Citizens United sued the FEC and lost in the lower courts, the case has now reached the high one.
The most significant issue that the Supreme Court has to deal with in all this is whether to allow corporations to participate directly in elections, which will effectively undo the 110-year-old Tillman Act that barred this type of spending. Not only is Citizens United for a reversal, but so is the NRA, AFL-CIO and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Salon weighs the possibilities of the court’s decision, saying:
“At one extreme, the justices could give corporations, unions and activist groups funded by wealthy donors virtual free rein to run election-time ads for or against candidates. Depending on the details, such a ruling could lay the groundwork for wealthy interests to press their rights further in future cases and argue they should be able to give money directly to presidential and congressional campaigns.
Going further, the court could strike down state laws banning such donations from campaigns. The justices also could decide that little or no information need be disclosed about such fundraising and spending.
At the other end of the spectrum, the court could stand by current federal law. It bans unions and incorporated entities such as businesses, trade associations and interest groups from donating to national party committees and congressional and presidential campaigns. It also prohibits, close to elections, the airing of ads that urge voters to support or oppose federal candidates.”
H/t to AdPulp which adds that if the court does allow this type of money to filter in, “many traditional agencies will jump at the chance to get a piece of that pie.” A ruling on the case is expected as early as tomorrow.
More: “Ad Groups Band Together to Oppose Tobacco Ad Restrictions”