Citizens United: when corporations became speakers
In 2010 the Supreme Court held 5–4: corporations and unions may spend without limit on independent political advertising. Since then: Super PACs and "dark money". The decision that defined money as speech and made transparency optional.
Summary
Citizens United v. FEC (21 January 2010) struck limits on independent expenditures by corporations and unions: as long as spending is uncoordinated with a campaign, it is protected “speech”. Corporations now fund Super PACs running attack ads; “dark money” (via 501(c)(4) groups that hide donors) grew into a billion-dollar industry.
Debunking
False: “Citizens United allows direct donations to candidates.” — No: independent expenditures only. Direct corporate contributions remain banned (Tillman Act 1907). The distinction is technical — and it is the core of the debate.
Also false: “Dark money is only Republican.” — Both parties use 501(c)(4)s and Super PACs. The abolition of transparency is bipartisan.