45 Pages Posted: 3 Oct 2010 Last revised: 26 Dec 2010
Date Written: October 3, 2010
This Note proposes a new direction for the regulation of corporate electoral advocacy in the wake of Citizens United. Rather than examining whether Citizens United was rightly decided, it argues that broad disclosure and disclaimer regulations for corporate electoral speech are both constitutionally sound and normatively superior to outright prohibitions. After surveying state and federal disclosure and disclaimer requirements, the Note proposes a broader scope for such mandates than existing doctrine permits in the context of individual speech. It argues that regulations of corporate-funded electoral speech should be neither strictly limited to express candidate advocacy nor balanced against a right to anonymity.
Keywords: citizens united, corporate electoral speech, corporate political speech
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Winik, Daniel, Citizens Informed: Broader Disclosure and Disclaimer for Corporate Electoral Advocacy in the Wake of Citizens United (October 3, 2010). Yale Law Journal, Vol. 120, p. 550, 2010. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1686862