Yesterday, in a much awaited case, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a key part of the McCain/Feingold campaign finance reform bill. In Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (a link to the decision is here), the Supreme Court held that the restrictions on certain corporate spending on political speech were unconstitutional.
The case dealt only with corporate spending, but union campaign spending is regulated in the same way under the law, so is likely to be equally impacted by the decision.The opinion focused on spending on political speech that supported or criticized a specific candidate. In this case, it was a 2008 documentary that was highly critical of Hilary Clinton.
The opinion leaves in place disclosure and disclaimer requirements on such speech, as well as limitations on both union and corporate contributions to the campaigns of specific candidates. Also untouched by the opinion are the regulations regarding “issue ads” that do not call for the election or defeat of a particular candidate.
The opinion doesn’t have a significant impact on the day-to-day responsibilities of a labor professional. It is important, however, to note the potential for a significantly more robust spending effort on both sides of the union/management line, in the upcoming election cycle.