Read Case 2.6 on page 59. Answer the question, "Should corporations have constitutional rights?" Why or why not? Please support your opinion with resources.

FACT SUMMARY In an attempt to regulate big WORDS OF THE COURT: Protected Speech money campaign contributions by corporations "The Court has recognized that First Amendment and labor unions in federal elections, Congress protection extends to corporations.... When Govenacted the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act ernment seeks to use its full power, including the in 2002 (commonly referred to as the "McCain- criminal law, to command where a person may get Feingold Act"), which imposed a wide variety his or her information or what distrusted source he of restrictions on "electioneering communica- or she may not hear, it uses censorship to control tions," including an outright ban on issue advocacy thought. This is unlawful. The First Amendment advertising or issue ads paid for by corporations confirms the freedom to think for ourselves. ... and labor unions. Citizens United, a conservative Modern day movies, television comedies, or skits nonprofit corporation, produced a 90 -minute docu- on Youtube.com might portray public officials or mentary called Hillary: The Movie, which criti- public policies in unflattering ways. Yet if a covered cized then-Senator Hillary Clinton and questioned transmission during the blackout period creates the her fitness for office. (Figure 2.1 depicts the poster background for candidate endorsement or opposiart that Citizens United used to promote its politi- tion, a felony occurs solely because a corporation, cal documentary.) The group planned to show the other than an exempt media corporation, has made film on cable TV during the upcoming 2008 Dem- the 'purchase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, ocratic presidential primaries. Before releasing the deposit, or gift of money or anything of value' in film, Citizens United brought an action in the U.S. order to engage in political speech. Speech would District Court for the District of Columbia against be suppressed in the realm where its necessity is the Federal Election Commission (FEC), the most evident: in the public dialogue preceding a real agency in charge of enforcing federal election law. election. Governments are often hostile to speech, The U.S. district court ruled in favor of the FEC, but under our law and our tradition it seems stranger and Citizens United appealed to the U.S. Supreme than fiction for our Government to make this politiCourt, arguing that the campaign reform finance cal speech a crime. Yet this is the statute's purpose law violated the First Amendment on its face and and design." when applied to Hillary: The Movie and to the ads promoting the film. Case Questions SYNOPSIS OF DECISION AND OPINION The 1. What if Citizens United had published a book U.S. Supreme Court reversed the lower court and cizing Hillary Clinton? Does the McCainruled in favor of Citizens United by a 5-4 vote. Feingold Act apply to the publication of books? The Court ruled that political spending is a form 2. Should corporations have constitutional rights? of protected speech under the First Amendment 3. Focus on Critical Thinking: A week after the and that the government may not prevent corpoU.S. Supreme Court announced its decision rations or labor unions from spending money to in the Citizens United case, President Obama support or denounce individual candidates in elec- publicly criticized the Court's decision in his tions. Although this First Amendment right is annual State of the Union speech. (You can not absolute-Congress may continue to restrict check out President Obama's criticism of the corporations from donating money directly to Citizens United decision here: https://www candidates-Congress may not prevent corpora- .youtube.com/watch?v=deGg41IiWwU.) Do tions from seeking to persuade the voting public you think President Obama's critique is correct through other means, including TV ads. or misguided