We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
First Amendment Fault Lines and the Citizens United Decision.
- Authors
Youn, Monica
- Abstract
The article focuses on the campaign finance doctrine, with respect to the constitutional fault line between the volitional and commodity accounts of the U.S. First Amendment value and the court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (FEC). It says that the differential treatment of contributions and expenditures in the Barkley v. Valeo court is partly based on differing accounts of the First Amendment value. It explores the constitutional fault lines across the campaign finance case law while the two accounts of the First Amendment are included in various elements of political spending. The author argues that the conception of speech fails as the economic marketplace cannot be considered as a sufficient proxy for the ultimate ideal of the First Amendment.
- Subjects
UNITED States; CAMPAIGN fund laws; CONSTITUTIONAL law; WILL; UNITED States. Constitution. 1st Amendment; LEGAL judgments; CITIZENS United v. Federal Election Commission; BUNDLING (Campaign finance); CAMPAIGN speeches; PROXY
- Publication
Harvard Law & Policy Review, 2011, Vol 5, Issue 1, p135
- ISSN
1935-2077
- Publication type
Article