Supreme Court/Citizens United
As a result of the Citizens United decision, the Court opened the campaign spending flood gates so that corporations and unions could spend unlimited amounts of money on political activities, as long as it was done independently of a party or a candidate. (Accordingly, huge amount of cash poured into so called super PACS-particularly single candidate PACS or political action committees, which are nominally only independent from the candidates that they support.) As a result, legal protections for corporations mean much of the spending, known as “dark money”, never has to be publicly disposed.
Thanks to the Citizens United case, supporters can make the maximum $5,200.00 donation directly to a candidate and then make an unlimited contribution to a single candidate Super Pac. Accordingly, the super wealthy, using million dollar contributions are now drowning out the voices of ordinary citizens.
The future of Citizens United will to a great degree, depend upon the makeup of the Supreme Court in the future.
Clinton and Trump have opposite views relating to the Citizens United decision. Clinton feels the case must be reversed; therefore, there will be a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees who will pledge to overturn Citizens United. An analysis of the eleven potential nominees that Trump would consider to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia, in all likelihood, would not reverse Citizens United.
