Citizens United, public health, and democracy: The Supreme Court ruling, its implications, and proposed action

W.H. Wiist

American Journal of Public Health, 2011, vol. 101, issue 7, 1172-1179

Abstract: The 2010 US Supreme Court Citizens United v Federal Election Commission 130 US 876 (2010) case concerned the plans of a nonprofit organization to distribute a film about presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. The Court ruled that prohibiting corporate independent expenditures for advocacy advertising during election campaigns unconstitutionally inhibits free speech. Corporations can now make unlimited contributions to election advocacy advertising directly from the corporate treasury. Candidates who favor public health positions may be subjected to corporate opposition advertising. Citizen groups and legislators have proposed remedies to ameliorate the effects of the Court's ruling. The public health field needs to apply its expertise, in collaboration with others, to work to reduce the disproportionate influence of corporate political speech on health policy and democracy.

Date: 2011
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.2105/AJPH.2010.300043

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2010.300043_8

DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2010.300043

Access Statistics for this article

American Journal of Public Health is currently edited by Alfredo Morabia

More articles in American Journal of Public Health from American Public Health Association
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Christopher F Baum ().