U.S. Politics and Corporate Speech: A Two-Edged Sword

In its 2010 Citizens United decision, the Supreme Court gave corporations relatively unlimited free-speech rights to spend corporate funds for political causes and candidates. A part of the majority’s reasoning was that if corporate media entities — for example, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Fox News and CNN — have undeniable First Amendment rights to endorse causes and candidates, why should non-media corporate entities be denied the same rights?

In essence, the court based its decision on reasoning that corporations are associations of individuals and so ought to have the same free-speech rights as individuals, that spending money on politics is a form of free speech and that corporate political spending was not and would not be seen as corrupt.

Already a subscriber? Sign In

About the Author(s)

Related Articles

Navigate the Boardroom

Sign up for the Directors & Boards weekly newsletter for the latest news, trends and analysis impacting public company boardrooms.