Citizens United or Money Talks?
- wisdomthroughunity
- Jul 23
- 3 min read
In American democracy. Money talks. Period. This is not some conspiracy, it is the reality of our politics. Corporations and wealthy individuals do have more power, and more influence in politics. Significantly more power than the average person does. This dynamic was dramatically shaped through the Supreme Court ruling Citizens United. This ruling has tilted our politics towards wealthy interests over the interests of the people.
What is Citizens United?
The case began when a conservative nonprofit, Citizens United, wanted to air a film critical of Hillary Clinton before the 2008 Democratic primaries. The FEC blocked it under existing campaign finance laws, specifically the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), which barred corporations and unions from using their general treasury funds for “electioneering communication” within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election.
The Supreme Court ruled in a narrow 5-4 decision that these restrictions violated the First Amendment's protection of free speech.
The court said that corporations, associations, and labor unions could spend unlimited money on political communication, so long as it was done independently and not coordinated directly with a candidate.
The Impact of Citizens United
Before Citizens United:
Corporations and unions were prohibited from directly spending from their general funds on election ads or “electioneering communications.”
Individual contribution limits to candidates still existed (and still do).
Transparency laws had more bite because donations could often be traced through required disclosures.
After Citizens United:
Outside groups could now spend unlimited amounts to support or oppose candidates, as long as it wasn’t directly coordinated.
This gave rise to Super PACs, which can raise and spend unlimited funds.
There was an explosion of Dark Money, (political spending by nonprofits that don’t disclose donors).
According to OpenSecrets, dark money groups spent over $1 billion in federal elections between 2010 and 2020, much of it from anonymous sources.
How Citizens United Affects Democracy
The ruling didn’t just change legal precedent. It changed how our democracy works. You may disagree with me, but I believe this is a detrimental ruling that negatively affected our politics. Citizens United amplified the political voice of the ultra-wealthy and muted the average voter. I want to clarify this is not a left or right ideology, this affects the very fabric of our democracy and wealthy corporations will endorse candidates that align with their bottom line.
Here’s how:
Super PACs can run endless political ads, many of them misleading or negative without needing to disclose their backers.
Wealthy donors can funnel millions through multiple organizations, shielding their identities and avoiding accountability.
Regular citizens are drowned out by the sheer volume and repetition of paid messaging.
In 2020 alone, the top 10 donors to Super PACs gave more than $1 billion, compared to the average individual donation of just over $100.
While individuals are still capped in how much they can donate directly to a candidate ($3,300 as of 2024), they can give unlimited amounts to outside groups.
Clarification of “Dark Money”?
Citizens United did not directly legalize anonymity in contributions, but it opened the floodgates for groups that already weren’t required to disclose donors, such as “social welfare” organizations, to spend heavily on elections. These groups don’t have to reveal their funders, and they can spend millions influencing political outcomes.
A 2022 report from Issue One, a bipartisan political reform group, found that the majority of dark money spent in the 2020 election came from just a few organizations and most of them hid their donor lists.
A Call for Action
If you're feeling powerless, you're not alone. But awareness is the first step toward fixing a system that increasingly feels rigged. Here’s what can be done:
Push for transparency laws requiring disclosure of political donations, even for 501(c)(4)s.
Support constitutional amendments or legislation to overturn Citizens United
Advocate for publicly funded elections to reduce candidate dependence on major donors.
Demand media literacy and reform, so voters aren’t manipulated by repetitive ads and misinformation.
Conclusion: Power Should Belong to the People
Citizens United didn’t invent corruption, but it legitimized and scaled it. Our democracy has become hostage to big money donors. This made money talk in politics, drowning out the voice of the people. I do not think that is how American politics should be.
If we want a country where power genuinely belongs to the people, we need to be aware, informed, and ready to demand change. Let’s work together to understand what happened and more importantly, how we can fix it. It's hard to look at this and not see how this is a detrimental ruling that needs overturned.
Sources
Comments