During the 2008 election, a conservative non-profit organization named “Citizens United” produced Hillary: The Movie, a documentary critical of then-Sen. Hillary Clinton. Because of the political nature of the movie and the fact that Citizens United intended to purchase airtime on a video on-demand service on cable television, the movie was deemed an “electioneering communication” by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and was therefore subject to the rules governing the production of political ads, including limitations on who may fund them. Citizens United sued in federal court to overturn the decision, lost and appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court accepted the case, heard the arguments and was set to make a ruling on whether the FEC was correct to classify the movie as an “electioneering communication,” when it did something unexpected. Rather than ruling on the case, the court asked for a rehearing, but on a much broader question than the nature of this one political movie. The court now wants to consider overturning the restrictions on all corporate and union contributions to political campaigns. If the Court rules that limits on contribution from corporations and unions are unconstitutional, it could effectively reverse a series of Supreme Court decisions and Congressional action going back more than a century.

Russ Feingold Statement – Citizens United vs FEC

A reversal of these restrictions would make it impossible for real democracy to happen. We would not be doing the Health Care Reform Shuffle if the special interests were not having such a big part voice in the negotiations. We would have real reform, not a song and dance.

I want to hear your thoughts…