A major effect of Citizens United v. FEC?

• A. The rise of Super PACs and a large increase in independent political spending.
• B. A ban on corporate political advertising.
• C. A requirement for corporate donations to be matched by individuals.
• D. A prohibition on unions contributing to campaigns.

Answer: (A)

The main idea tested is how protecting free speech influences campaign financing. Citizens United v. FEC held that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in elections is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment, so it cannot be banned. This opened the door for the creation of Super PACs, which can raise and spend unlimited sums from corporations, unions, and individuals to advocate for or against candidates, as long as they don’t coordinate with campaigns. The result is a huge rise in independent political spending and advertising outside of candidate committees. The other options don’t fit: the ruling did not ban corporate political advertising, there is no requirement for corporate donations to be matched by individuals, and unions are not prohibited from contributing; they can participate in independent expenditures through such committees.