Which statement best captures the Citizens United view on corporate spending and free speech?

• A. It bans corporate spending.
• B. It protects corporate spending as free speech.
• C. It requires disclosure of corporate donors.
• D. It bans unions from spending.

Answer: (B)

Corporate spending in elections is treated as protected speech. Citizens United v. FEC held that the First Amendment protects a corporation’s right to fund political communications independently of a candidate’s campaign, so government restrictions on those independent expenditures cannot be imposed simply because the spender is a corporation. This means you can spend money on ads or messages that advocate for or against candidates, as long as the spending is independent of the candidate’s campaign. The ruling does not ban corporate spending, and it doesn’t mandate donor disclosure as the central point. Those are separate issues tied to campaign finance beyond the core idea that corporate spending is a form of free speech.