Abstract

Campaign finance restrictions were scaled back when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the cases Citizens United V. Federal Election Commission and McCutcheon V. Federal Election Commission. The Citizens United ruling was based on the premise that the federal government cannot constitutionally regulate who – or what – is able to contribute campaign funds without violating the free speech clause of the First Amendment. McCutcheon makes the same argument with regard to aggregate contribution limits. This paper argues that these rulings effectively eviscerate legislation meant to thwart corruption and avoid undue influence in the political process. This paper reviews each of the two U.S. Supreme Court decisions, examines how the rulings alter the way campaigns are financed, and argues that these two rulings are more harmful than helpful to campaign finance.