The Rationale of the Supreme Court's Decision in Citizen United (The Essay

The Rationale of the Supreme Court's Decision in Citizen United (The Majority Opinion by Justice Kennedy) - Essay Example This research will begin with the statement that in the course of 2008 election, Citizens United, a conservative non-profit organization, produced Hillary: The Movies, a documentary criticizing Senator Hillary Clinton by then. The movie was considered by Federal Election Commission (FEC) as an electioneering communication due to the political nature of the movie and because Citizen United aimed at purchasing airtime on a video-on-demand service on a cable television. Thus, this movie was subject to laws governing the production of political advertisements as well as limitations on who may fund them. Citizen United prosecuted in federal court to capsize decision lost and appealed to the Supreme Court. When pronouncing their verdict, the majority maintained that political speech is crucial to a democracy, which is not less than truth due to the fact that the speech originated from a corporation. The majority also asserted that disclosure requirements of BCRA were constitutional as appl ied to Hillary: The Movie, with a reason that a governmental interest justified disclosure by offering the electorate with information regarding election-connected spending resources. They also maintained the disclosure rules for political advertising sponsors and it maintained the outlaw on direct contributions to candidates from organizations and unions. Books Llc asserts that in a separate compatible opinion, Justice Steven stressed the manner in which the court handles constitutional issues and its efforts to shun constitutional issues when at all probable. He asserted that here, the court lacked narrower grounds upon which to rule, apart from handling issues of the First Amendment personified in the case. Steven also argued that corporations are not members of society and that there are convincing governmental interests to control ability of corporations to spend money in the course of local and national elections. Even though majority rationale was right when it said that poli tical speech is crucial to a democracy as it influence electorates, it was not right for them to rule against Citizen United. This is because as far as First Amendment has to be observed, all citizens have constitutional rights to express themselves freely and freedom of speech.