For decades, the answer to that question has been a firm “no.” As far back as 1907, Congress has passed legislation banning corporations and national banks from contributing money to federal campaigns. In fact, in 1947 legislation was passed that also banned independent campaign expenditures by both corporations and unions. Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce upheld that ban in 1990, and the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) of 2002 went even further in its regulation of campaign donations.
But just a week ago, the Supreme Court made a decision that might change the answer to our question forever. The high court postponed a narrow ruling on Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and instead ordered a second argument, setting the stage to broadly re-examine whether corporate campaign expenditures may be restricted at all.
In the case, the conservative group Citizens United asked the court to reject restrictions in the BCRA that would have forced a disclosure of who paid for “Hillary: The Movie,” a film critical of the then-presidential candidate. But the court appears poised to go much further.
