Supreme Court ruling allows unlimited corporate spending to support or oppose political candidates

January 25, 2010

Sweeping aside decades of legislative restrictions on the role of corporations in political campaigns, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that companies can spend as much as they want to support or oppose individual candidates, although the companies must still disclose their role. As the Washington Post reported, Republican leaders cheered the ruling as a victory for free speech and predicted a surge in corporate support for GOP candidates in November’s midterm elections.

President Obama sharply criticized the ruling, calling it “a green light to a new stampede of special interest money” and “a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans.”

In a 5-to-4 decision, the Supreme Court majority concluded that corporations have the same rights as individuals when it comes to political speech, the Post reported. Since 1947, corporations were banned from using their profits to endorse or oppose political candidates — a restriction ruled unconstitutional by the judges last week. The ruling will likely also apply to labor unions, although they are not explicitly mentioned in the majority’s opinion, the newspaper reported.

Campaign-finance experts argued that most corporations have little desire to become involved in the muck of individual elections and are happy to continue using lobbying and campaign contributions as their main tools of influence.  — Greg Beaubien

For further reading:
Is Supreme Court’s Decision A Public Relations Boon? (PRSAY)

View Comments