Exhibit 894

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310

Exhibit 894 · Court opinion

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310

The First Amendment protects political speech; and disclosure permits citizens and shareholders to react to the speech of corporate entities in a proper way. This transparency enables the electorate to make informed decisions and give proper weight to different speakers and messages.

5-4 that corporations may make independent expenditures; 8-1 (Thomas dissenting in part) upholding BCRA disclaimer and disclosure requirements. Cornell syllabus lists the joins.

Source: U.S. Supreme Court
Date: 21 January 2010
Quoted from: Part IV-B (reporter page not verified)
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-205.ZO.html
Accessed: 2026-11-10
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Cited by

Finding POL-5.1: Primary record In Citizens United (2010) the Supreme Court held, 5 to 4, that independent expenditures by corporations do not give rise to corruption or its appearance, and held, 8 to 1, that the disclaimer and disclosure requirements of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act are constitutional. In SpeechNow.org v. FEC (D.C. Circuit, en banc, 26 March 2010) the court held that contributions to groups making only independent expenditures cannot be limited and upheld the registration and reporting requirements for those groups.